Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] ACPI: CPPC: Add u64 wrappers for the autonomous selection register
Sumit Gupta <[email protected]> Fri, 24 Jul 2026 00:58:02 +0530
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.acpica-devel,org.kernel.vger.linux-acpi,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-pm,org.kernel.vger.linux-tegra |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 21/07/26 21:04, Rafael J. Wysocki (Intel) wrote: > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments > > > On Fri, Jul 17, 2026 at 5:47 AM zhenglifeng (A) <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 7/16/2026 11:38 PM, Sumit Gupta wrote: >>> cppc_get_auto_sel()/cppc_set_auto_sel() use a bool, unlike the other >>> CPPC register get/set helpers which use a u64. >>> >>> The next patch in this series saves and restores the OSPM-set registers >>> across CPU hotplug using a common table of get/set helpers typed as >>> int (*)(int, u64 *) and int (*)(int, u64), which the bool autonomous >>> selection helpers do not fit. >>> >>> Add cppc_get_auto_sel_u64()/cppc_set_auto_sel_u64() wrappers with the u64 >>> signature so the autonomous selection register fits alongside the others. >>> >>> Suggested-by: Pierre Gondois <[email protected]> >>> Signed-off-by: Sumit Gupta <[email protected]> >> If this is necessary, I think it is better to just change the input parameter >> of the original cppc_get/set_auto_sel() to u64. > Agreed. > > Sumit, why don't you just make cppc_get_auto_sel()/cppc_set_auto_sel() > take a u64 argument Yes, that makes sense. I originally added the wrappers to avoid changing the existing interface, but updating them directly is cleaner. In v3, I’ll drop the wrappers and change cppc_get/set_auto_sel() to take a u64 directly, updating all callers accordingly. Regards, Sumit Gupta