[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <379ee551-c2ef-72ca-9372-c812373a1e0c@nvidia.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2023 19:41:30 +0530
From: Sumit Gupta <sumitg@...dia.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
CC: <rafael@...nel.org>, <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<treding@...dia.com>, <jonathanh@...dia.com>, <bbasu@...dia.com>,
<amiettinen@...dia.com>, Sumit Gupta <sumitg@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch v2 1/2] cpufreq: tegra194: save CPU data to avoid repeated
SMP calls
On 03/10/23 10:30, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>
>
> On 29-09-23, 19:47, Sumit Gupta wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 28/09/23 12:35, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>>> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>>>
>>>
>>> On 01-09-23, 22:11, Sumit Gupta wrote:
>>>> @@ -131,19 +132,10 @@ static int tegra234_get_cpu_ndiv(u32 cpu, u32 cpuid, u32 clusterid, u64 *ndiv)
>>>> static void tegra234_set_cpu_ndiv(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, u64 ndiv)
>>>> {
>>>
>>>> + for_each_cpu_and(cpu, policy->cpus, cpu_online_mask)
>>>
>>> (Yes this is existing code, but ..) you don't need to perform AND with
>>> cpu_online_mask as policy->cpus should only contain currently online CPUs.
>>>
>>> Please check if you ever see it differently.
>>>
>>
>> I think this was kept to be safe.
>> Should I removed the AND in v3 or send separate patch?
>
> Sending it separately would be ideal.
>
> --
> viresh
Sent v3 with the "sizeof(*data->cpu_data)" change.
Will send a separate patch with change to remove AND with mask as suggested.
Thank you,
Sumit Gupta
Powered by blists - more mailing lists