Len Brown noticed something was amiss in our INTEL_FAM6_*
definitions. It seems like model 0x1F was a Nehalem part,
marketed as "Intel Core i7 and i5 Processors" (according to the
SDM). But, although it was a Nehalem 0x1F had some uncore events
which were shared with Westmere.
Len also mentioned he thought it was called "Havendale", which
Wikipedia says was graphics-oriented and canceled:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nehalem_(microarchitecture)
So either way, it's probably not imporant what we call it, but
call it Nehalem to be accurate, and add a "G" since it seems
graphics-related. If it were canceled that would be a good reason
why it's so sparsely and inconsistently referred to in the code.
Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net>
Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160629192737.949C41A8@viggo.jf.intel.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
#define INTEL_FAM6_CORE2_DUNNINGTON 0x1D
#define INTEL_FAM6_NEHALEM 0x1E
+#define INTEL_FAM6_NEHALEM_G 0x1F /* Auburndale / Havendale */
#define INTEL_FAM6_NEHALEM_EP 0x1A
#define INTEL_FAM6_NEHALEM_EX 0x2E
#define INTEL_FAM6_WESTMERE 0x25
-#define INTEL_FAM6_WESTMERE2 0x1F
#define INTEL_FAM6_WESTMERE_EP 0x2C
#define INTEL_FAM6_WESTMERE_EX 0x2F
static const struct x86_cpu_id intel_idle_ids[] __initconst = {
ICPU(INTEL_FAM6_NEHALEM_EP, idle_cpu_nehalem),
ICPU(INTEL_FAM6_NEHALEM, idle_cpu_nehalem),
- ICPU(INTEL_FAM6_WESTMERE2, idle_cpu_nehalem),
+ ICPU(INTEL_FAM6_NEHALEM_G, idle_cpu_nehalem),
ICPU(INTEL_FAM6_WESTMERE, idle_cpu_nehalem),
ICPU(INTEL_FAM6_WESTMERE_EP, idle_cpu_nehalem),
ICPU(INTEL_FAM6_NEHALEM_EX, idle_cpu_nehalem),