On Wed, 27 May 2020, Guenter Roeck wrote: > This exchange is exactly what I was concerned about when this driver > was first submitted. I should have known better, and I should not > have accepted it. Right now I seriously wonder if I should revert/drop > it. Any arguments/thoughts why I _shouldn't_ do that ? Let me apologize and explain my perspective. These AMD MSRs have been previously wired up in the turbostat tool, and very recently another developer submitted a patch to wire up the package energy counter MSR for use with perf. Unlike the above, this driver is submitted by AMD. As I have noticed a substantial issue (sum of core counters contradicting the package counter), I have attempted to report it in this thread. Since AMD is submitting the code, I was hoping to get their attention to the issue, and ideally get some explanations about how the counters work and to what extent we can expect them to be accurate. I think most of the discussion about (not) ignoring initial counter values was in part caused by misunderstanding exactly what issue I was reporting. After all, it's not so important if the driver accurately captures boot-time energy use, if the counters are not trustworthy. I don't have an answer to your question (whether you should keep the driver). I hope you see where I'm coming from. I'm not quite aware of the history with coretemp driver, so if all this caused you extra headaches, I apologize for my part in the mess. Alexander
