15/06/2026 11:22, fengchengwen: > On 6/15/2026 3:30 PM, Huisong Li wrote: > > This series centralizes the lcore ID verification in the power cpufreq > > framework, replacing the per-driver range checks with a common validation. > > > > Background > > ---------- > > Currently, various cpufreq drivers implement their own lcore ID checks, > > which are limited to simple range validation against RTE_MAX_LCORE and > > involve significant code duplication across 12+ functions per driver. > > The checks are duplicated across all drivers — any change requires > > updating 5+ drivers identically. Moreover, these checks do not verify > > whether the lcore is actually managed by the application. So it is better > > to verify lcore ID in cpufreq core. > > > > For cpufreq-related APIs, although service cores do not typically invoke > > these APIs, they may operate in polling modes where power management is > > required. To maintain compatibility with applications using service cores, > > the validation logic now explicitly accepts both ROLE_RTE and ROLE_SERVICE. > > > > The usage of power QoS APIs are similar to that of cpufreq. They also can > > accepts ROLE_RTE and ROLE_SERVICE. > > > > For PMD power management APIs, the lcore must be ROLE_RTE because these > > are used together with the data plane of ethdev PMD. Hence, > > rte_lcore_is_enabled() is used for validation. > > LGTM > Series-acked-by: Chengwen Feng <[email protected]>
Applied, thanks. There are other patches for the power library which require reviews. Please all, review each other to unblock patches.
