[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160125154340.GE16975@hr-amur2>
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 23:43:41 +0800
From: Huang Rui <ray.huang@....com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"Andy Lutomirski" <luto@...capital.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Robert Richter <rric@...nel.org>,
Jacob Shin <jacob.w.shin@...il.com>,
"John Stultz" <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Fr�d�ric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <spg_linux_kernel@....com>,
<x86@...nel.org>, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Andreas Herrmann <herrmann.der.user@...glemail.com>,
Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>,
Aravind Gopalakrishnan <Aravind.Gopalakrishnan@....com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"Fengguang Wu" <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] perf/x86/amd/power: Add AMD accumulated power
reporting mechanism
On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 12:13:05PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:32:03PM +0800, Huang Rui wrote:
> > +struct power_pmu {
> > + raw_spinlock_t lock;
> > + struct list_head active_list;
>
> Maybe a dumb question, but what is that list for?
>
> You only ever add/del events to/from it, you never iterate it. So why
> keep it?
>
> If you drop the list, the lock can go too I think, making all this stuff
> simpler.
Yes, the active_list seems a bit superfluous if not be iterated. I
will remove it.
Any other comments? :-)
Thanks,
Rui
Powered by blists - more mailing lists