Hi Shyam, On 5/25/23 11:46, Shyam Sundar S K wrote: > > > On 5/23/2023 1:56 PM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote: >> On Tue, 16 May 2023, Shyam Sundar S K wrote: >> >>> Add a helper routine to check the underlying cpu id, that can be used >>> across the PMC driver to remove the duplicate code. >>> >>> Co-developed-by: Sanket Goswami <Sanket.Goswami@xxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Sanket Goswami <Sanket.Goswami@xxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Shyam Sundar S K <Shyam-sundar.S-k@xxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmc.c | 17 ++++++++++++++--- >>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmc.c b/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmc.c >>> index e2439fda5c02..7e5e6afb3410 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmc.c >>> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmc.c >>> @@ -564,6 +564,18 @@ static void amd_pmc_dbgfs_unregister(struct amd_pmc_dev *dev) >>> debugfs_remove_recursive(dev->dbgfs_dir); >>> } >>> >>> +static bool amd_pmc_check_sup_cpuid(struct amd_pmc_dev *dev) >> >> Does sup refer to "supported" or some other acronym? If the latter, > > Yes, please read that as "supported" > >> you should mention/open it in the changelog and/or in a comment. If the >> former, the function naming seems too generic (an observation entirely >> based on how/where the function is used, you're not exactly verbose on >> what this actually checks for other than what looks like a set of CPU >> IDs but clearly there's more behind it). > > OK. renaming the function as amd_pmc_is_cpu_supported() would be fine? Yes that should be fine. Regards, Hans
