On 1/31/26 7:58 AM, Sumit Gupta wrote:

On 31/01/26 09:36, zhenglifeng (A) wrote:

quoted

External email: Use caution opening links or attachments


Hi Sumit,

I am thinking that maybe it is better to call these two sysfs interface
'min_freq' and 'max_freq' as users read and write khz instead of raw
value.

Thanks for the suggestion.
Kept min_perf/max_perf to match the CPPC register names
(MIN_PERF/MAX_PERF), making it clear to users familiar with
CPPC what's being controlled.
The kHz unit is documented in the ABI.

Thank you,
Sumit Gupta

On my x86 machine with kernel 6.18.5, the kernel is exposing raw values:

grep . /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/acpi_cppc/*

/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/acpi_cppc/feedback_ctrs:ref:342904018856568
del:437439724183386
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/acpi_cppc/guaranteed_perf:63
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/acpi_cppc/highest_perf:88
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/acpi_cppc/lowest_freq:0
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/acpi_cppc/lowest_nonlinear_perf:36
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/acpi_cppc/lowest_perf:1
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/acpi_cppc/nominal_freq:3900
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/acpi_cppc/nominal_perf:62
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/acpi_cppc/reference_perf:62
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/acpi_cppc/wraparound_time:18446744073709551615

It would be surprising for a nearby sysfs interface with very similar
names to use kHz instead.

Thanks,

Russell Haley