[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160810171926.44557e35@xhacker>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 17:19:26 +0800
From: Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@...vell.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
CC: <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
<daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: cpuidle: declare cpuidle_ops __read_mostly
Dear Arnd,
On Wed, 10 Aug 2016 10:57:57 +0200 Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 10, 2016 4:49:57 PM CEST Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/cpuidle.c b/arch/arm/kernel/cpuidle.c
> > index 7dccc96..762e0929 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/kernel/cpuidle.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/cpuidle.c
> > @@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ extern struct of_cpuidle_method __cpuidle_method_of_table[];
> > static const struct of_cpuidle_method __cpuidle_method_of_table_sentinel
> > __used __section(__cpuidle_method_of_table_end);
> >
> > -static struct cpuidle_ops cpuidle_ops[NR_CPUS];
> > +static struct cpuidle_ops cpuidle_ops[NR_CPUS] __read_mostly;
>
> Should this perhaps be percpu data instead?
>
Per my understanding, percpu is used for those vars with normal read/write
frequency, while the cpuidle_ops is read mostly, so IMHO, __read_mostly
is suitable, what do you think?
Thanks,
Jisheng
Powered by blists - more mailing lists