public inbox for linux-next@vger.kernel.org 
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Xiaojian Du <xiaojidu@amd•com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel•org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix•de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat•com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor•com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead•org>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8•de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger•kernel.org>,
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger•kernel.org>,
	Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd•com>,
	Perry Yuan <perry.yuan@amd•com>,
	Xiaojian Du <Xiaojian.Du@amd•com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the pm tree
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 11:00:26 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <db2165ae-2086-d60a-df31-dbf7711060ac@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZnmnqjCZ_dx0xXjw@sirena.org.uk>

Hi Mark,

Many thanks for your help.

On 2024/6/25 1:06, Mark Brown wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in:
>
>    arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
>
> between commit:
>
>    c7107750b2ffa ("x86/cpufeatures: Add AMD FAST CPPC feature flag")
>
> from the pm tree and commit:
>
>    78ce84b9e0a54 ("x86/cpufeatures: Flip the /proc/cpuinfo appearance logic")
>
> from the tip tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.
>
> diff --cc arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
> index 6c128d463a143,6007462e03d66..0000000000000
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
> @@@ -465,12 -466,11 +466,12 @@@
>     *
>     * Reuse free bits when adding new feature flags!
>     */
> - #define X86_FEATURE_AMD_LBR_PMC_FREEZE	(21*32+ 0) /* AMD LBR and PMC Freeze */
> - #define X86_FEATURE_CLEAR_BHB_LOOP	(21*32+ 1) /* "" Clear branch history at syscall entry using SW loop */
> - #define X86_FEATURE_BHI_CTRL		(21*32+ 2) /* "" BHI_DIS_S HW control available */
> - #define X86_FEATURE_CLEAR_BHB_HW	(21*32+ 3) /* "" BHI_DIS_S HW control enabled */
> - #define X86_FEATURE_CLEAR_BHB_LOOP_ON_VMEXIT (21*32+ 4) /* "" Clear branch history at vmexit using SW loop */
> - #define X86_FEATURE_FAST_CPPC		(21*32 + 5) /* "" AMD Fast CPPC */
> + #define X86_FEATURE_AMD_LBR_PMC_FREEZE	(21*32+ 0) /* "amd_lbr_pmc_freeze" AMD LBR and PMC Freeze */
> + #define X86_FEATURE_CLEAR_BHB_LOOP	(21*32+ 1) /* Clear branch history at syscall entry using SW loop */
> + #define X86_FEATURE_BHI_CTRL		(21*32+ 2) /* BHI_DIS_S HW control available */
> + #define X86_FEATURE_CLEAR_BHB_HW	(21*32+ 3) /* BHI_DIS_S HW control enabled */
> + #define X86_FEATURE_CLEAR_BHB_LOOP_ON_VMEXIT (21*32+ 4) /* Clear branch history at vmexit using SW loop */
> ++#define X86_FEATURE_FAST_CPPC		(21*32 + 5) /* AMD Fast CPPC */
>    

But it is better to hide this new flag "Fast CPPC", prefer to use " /* 
"" AMD Fast CPPC */ ".
Not expected that "CPPC" and "Fast CPPC" are listed to user at the same 
time, it will cause confusion.

Thanks,
Xiaojian

>    /*
>     * BUG word(s)

  reply	other threads:[~2024-06-25  3:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 71+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-06-24 17:06 linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the pm tree Mark Brown
2024-06-25  3:00 ` Xiaojian Du [this message]
2024-06-25  4:25   ` Borislav Petkov
2024-06-25  4:51     ` Xiaojian Du
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2026-06-03 13:32 Mark Brown
2026-06-04 12:33 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2026-05-25 14:16 Mark Brown
2026-02-04 13:52 Mark Brown
2026-02-04 14:48 ` Wysocki, Rafael J
2026-02-04 14:56   ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-05-16  6:15 Stephen Rothwell
2025-05-16  7:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2025-05-16  9:54   ` Stephen Rothwell
2025-05-16 12:45     ` Ingo Molnar
2025-05-28  3:52 ` Stephen Rothwell
2025-05-12  4:55 Stephen Rothwell
2025-05-12  5:23 ` Stephen Rothwell
2025-05-12 20:45   ` Mario Limonciello
2025-05-15 15:49     ` Ingo Molnar
2025-05-15 15:50       ` Mario Limonciello
2025-05-28  3:50   ` Stephen Rothwell
2025-05-28 14:14     ` Limonciello, Mario
2025-05-28 22:12       ` Stephen Rothwell
2025-05-01  3:58 Stephen Rothwell
2025-05-06 15:07 ` Wysocki, Rafael J
2025-05-06 17:43   ` Ingo Molnar
2025-04-17  3:43 Stephen Rothwell
2025-04-17 11:22 ` Ingo Molnar
2024-07-02  4:15 Stephen Rothwell
2024-07-02  9:25 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-07-17  1:41 ` Stephen Rothwell
2024-07-17  2:33   ` srinivas pandruvada
2024-07-17  9:49     ` Borislav Petkov
2021-02-17  5:07 Stephen Rothwell
2021-02-17 10:15 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-02-22  0:34 ` Stephen Rothwell
2018-10-08  2:44 Stephen Rothwell
2018-10-08 10:06 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-08 10:34   ` Andy Shevchenko
2018-10-08  2:40 Stephen Rothwell
2018-10-08 10:05 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-08 10:41   ` Andy Shevchenko
2018-03-23  2:20 Stephen Rothwell
2018-03-23  6:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2018-03-23 21:09   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-03-24  8:15     ` Ingo Molnar
2017-11-06  2:10 Stephen Rothwell
2017-11-06 13:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-08-11  4:06 Stephen Rothwell
2017-09-04  4:43 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-11-22  5:48 Stephen Rothwell
2016-06-09  4:34 Stephen Rothwell
2016-04-19  2:59 Stephen Rothwell
2016-03-15  1:55 Stephen Rothwell
2016-03-11  1:57 Stephen Rothwell
2016-03-11 13:51 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-02-29  4:42 Stephen Rothwell
2015-10-06  3:07 Stephen Rothwell
2015-03-31  7:58 Stephen Rothwell
2015-03-31 22:23 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-03-31  7:10 Stephen Rothwell
2014-12-15  2:30 Stephen Rothwell
2014-11-25  5:46 Stephen Rothwell
2014-11-25 21:16 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-08-04  6:55 Stephen Rothwell
2014-05-09  4:49 Stephen Rothwell
2014-01-13  3:29 Stephen Rothwell
2014-01-07  4:20 Stephen Rothwell
2014-01-06  7:18 Stephen Rothwell
2013-08-19  4:09 Stephen Rothwell
2013-04-11  4:08 Stephen Rothwell

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=db2165ae-2086-d60a-df31-dbf7711060ac@amd.com \
    --to=xiaojidu@amd$(echo .)com \
    --cc=Xiaojian.Du@amd$(echo .)com \
    --cc=bp@alien8$(echo .)de \
    --cc=broonie@kernel$(echo .)org \
    --cc=hpa@zytor$(echo .)com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-next@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
    --cc=mario.limonciello@amd$(echo .)com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat$(echo .)com \
    --cc=perry.yuan@amd$(echo .)com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead$(echo .)org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix$(echo .)de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox