[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1602192246070.2477@nanos>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 22:50:54 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>
cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] powercap/rapl: reduce ipi calls
On Fri, 19 Feb 2016, Jacob Pan wrote:
> @@ -1380,6 +1375,7 @@ static int rapl_detect_topology(void)
> int i;
> int phy_package_id;
> struct rapl_package *new_package, *rp;
> + int lead_cpu;
>
> for_each_online_cpu(i) {
> phy_package_id = topology_physical_package_id(i);
> @@ -1392,7 +1388,11 @@ static int rapl_detect_topology(void)
> /* add the new package to the list */
> new_package->id = phy_package_id;
> new_package->nr_cpus = 1;
> -
> + /* find the first active cpu of the package */
> + lead_cpu = cpumask_any_and(topology_core_cpumask(i),
> + cpumask_of(i));
Yuck. Why any_and? The result is i, simply because i is online otherwise you
would not be there.
> + if (lead_cpu < nr_cpu_ids)
> + new_package->lead_cpu = lead_cpu;
So the above is identical to
new_package->lead_cpu = lead_cpu;
Hmm?
> @@ -1500,6 +1503,15 @@ static int rapl_cpu_callback(struct notifier_block *nfb,
> break;
> if (--rp->nr_cpus == 0)
> rapl_remove_package(rp);
> + else if (cpu == rp->lead_cpu) {
> + /* choose another active cpu in the package */
> + lead_cpu = cpumask_any_but(topology_core_cpumask(cpu), cpu);
This part is correct.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists