Re: [PATCH v4] x86: intel_epb: Add earlyparam option to keep bias at performance

[Dave Hansen]

On 1/2/24 06:46, Jack Allister wrote:
> With the suggestion above you mentioned implementing this, if this was to be implemented
> do you think keeping it `intel_epb_restore_default` as a bool is still worth it? e.g:
...
> Or do you think it would be worth actually removing `intel_epb_no_override` and creating
> a module variable `intel_epb_restore_default` which is an enum of the performance values.
> 
> Doing so would then allow for expansability in the future which you had already alluded to
> e.g setting to other values such as EPB_INDEX_BALANCE_POWERSAVE/PERFORMANCE.

You should leave 'intel_epb_restore_default' as a bool unless there is
some compelling reason to change it.  A _possible_ future need for more
settings isn't compelling.