[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180619124058.GX17720@e108498-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 13:40:59 +0100
From: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: rjw@...ysocki.net, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
mingo@...hat.com, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
morten.rasmussen@....com, chris.redpath@....com,
patrick.bellasi@....com, valentin.schneider@....com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, thara.gopinath@...aro.org,
viresh.kumar@...aro.org, tkjos@...gle.com, joelaf@...gle.com,
smuckle@...gle.com, adharmap@...cinc.com, skannan@...cinc.com,
pkondeti@...eaurora.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
edubezval@...il.com, srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com,
currojerez@...eup.net, javi.merino@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 03/10] PM: Introduce an Energy Model management
framework
On Tuesday 19 Jun 2018 at 13:31:06 (+0200), Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 03:24:58PM +0100, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > + read_lock_irqsave(&em_data_lock, flags);
> > + for_each_cpu(cpu, cpu_possible_mask) {
>
> I know we're likely to only use this on small systems, but this pattern
> is a very bad, Please look at alternatives.
Ok, this isn't supposed to be called very often (only once, at boot
time, for Arm for example), but I see your point.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists