[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200702121536.GA765585@google.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2020 13:15:36 +0100
From: Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>
To: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org,
peterz@...radead.org, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, morten.rasmussen@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/7] sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain
flag metadata
Hey Valentin,
On Wednesday 01 Jul 2020 at 20:06:50 (+0100), Valentin Schneider wrote:
> +/*
> + * Domain members have different CPU capacities
> + *
> + * SHARED_PARENT: Set from the topmost domain down to the first domain where
> + * asymmetry is detected.
> + */
> +SD_FLAG(SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, 5, SDF_SHARED_PARENT)
Probably not a huge deal, but I don't think this is _exactly_ how
SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY was defined originally, nor how the topology
detection code deals with it (IIRC).
That is, IIRC Morten defined SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY as the _lowest_ domain
at which all CPU capacities are visible. On all real systems I can think
of, this domain also happens to be the topmost domain, so that might not
be a huge deal and we can probably change that definition to the one you
suggest. But we should perhaps make the matching changes to
asym_cpu_capacity_level()/build_sched_domains() if we're going down that
path?
Thanks,
Quentin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists