linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] cpufreq: governor: support scheduler cpufreq callbacks on remote CPUs

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1811208.ius7TXdi4I@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date:	Fri, 29 Apr 2016 13:21:24 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc:	Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@...aro.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
	Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
	Juri Lelli <Juri.Lelli@....com>,
	Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>,
	Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] cpufreq: governor: support scheduler cpufreq callbacks on remote CPUs

On Friday, April 29, 2016 04:08:16 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 19-04-16, 19:39, Steve Muckle wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c
> > index 20f0a4e114d1..429d3a5b9866 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c
> > @@ -248,6 +248,20 @@ static void dbs_irq_work(struct irq_work *irq_work)
> >  	schedule_work_on(smp_processor_id(), &policy_dbs->work);
> >  }
> >  
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> > +static inline void dbs_irq_work_queue(struct policy_dbs_info *policy_dbs,
> > +				      int cpu)
> > +{
> > +	irq_work_queue_on(&policy_dbs->irq_work, cpu);
> > +}
> > +#else
> > +static inline void dbs_irq_work_queue(struct policy_dbs_info *policy_dbs,
> > +				      int cpu)
> > +{
> > +	irq_work_queue(&policy_dbs->irq_work);
> > +}
> > +#endif
> 
> Any clue, why we don't have a non-SMP version of irq_work_queue_on(), Which can
> simply call irq_work_queue() ?

Because nobody else needs it?

But I agree that it would be nicer to add the stub to irq_work.h.