On Sun, Jan 02, 2022 at 06:22:33PM -0800, srinivas pandruvada wrote: > On Sun, 2022-01-02 at 13:46 -0800, Ricardo Neri wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 07:43:22PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 4:23 PM Ricardo Neri > > > <ricardo.neri-calderon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > [...] > > > > This looks like it may be too general, because HFI is not a > > > thermal-only thing. > > > > > > > > Maybe cal it INTEL_HFI_THERMAL? > > > > True. The *Enhanced* HFI introduces the concept of thread classes > > [1]. I was > > planning to wrap this patchset, which parses the HFI table and deals > > with updates, as INTEL_HFI. The code that deals with classes would be > > wrapped as INTEL_EHFI. > > > > After this comment, so you still think that INTEL_HFI_THERMAL makes > > more > > sense? > In general most of the configs for Intel thermal is has THERMAL suffix, > so to be consistent may be add THERMAL also at the end. > > You can still add INTEL_EHFI as a silent config, which user will not > select. It will be selected by default with INTEL_HFI_THERMAL. That makes sense to me. I will add the _THERMAL suffix to the config option. Thanks and BR, Ricardo
