linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: Merge initialization code of sg

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0ji+=6xUk1yDkEMe=3tuUSJxOhe+wgVb4cgjJ07R9-vsA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 6 Oct 2023 21:52:48 +0200
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Liao Chang <liaochang1@...wei.com>
Cc:     mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
        vincent.guittot@...aro.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
        rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com, mgorman@...e.de,
        bristot@...hat.com, vschneid@...hat.com, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: Merge initialization code of sg_cpu
 in single loop

On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 10:55 AM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> On 08-09-23, 03:16, Liao Chang wrote:
> > The initialization code of the per-cpu sg_cpu struct is currently split
> > into two for-loop blocks. This can be simplified by merging the two
> > blocks into a single loop. This will make the code more maintainable.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Liao Chang <liaochang1@...wei.com>
> > ---
> >  kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c | 11 +++--------
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> > index 4492608b7d7f..f3a95def49cc 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> > @@ -767,14 +767,6 @@ static int sugov_start(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> >
> >       sg_policy->need_freq_update = cpufreq_driver_test_flags(CPUFREQ_NEED_UPDATE_LIMITS);
> >
> > -     for_each_cpu(cpu, policy->cpus) {
> > -             struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu = &per_cpu(sugov_cpu, cpu);
> > -
> > -             memset(sg_cpu, 0, sizeof(*sg_cpu));
> > -             sg_cpu->cpu                     = cpu;
> > -             sg_cpu->sg_policy               = sg_policy;
> > -     }
> > -
> >       if (policy_is_shared(policy))
> >               uu = sugov_update_shared;
> >       else if (policy->fast_switch_enabled && cpufreq_driver_has_adjust_perf())
> > @@ -785,6 +777,9 @@ static int sugov_start(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> >       for_each_cpu(cpu, policy->cpus) {
> >               struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu = &per_cpu(sugov_cpu, cpu);
> >
> > +             memset(sg_cpu, 0, sizeof(*sg_cpu));
> > +             sg_cpu->cpu = cpu;
> > +             sg_cpu->sg_policy = sg_policy;
> >               cpufreq_add_update_util_hook(cpu, &sg_cpu->update_util, uu);
> >       }
> >       return 0;
>
> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>

Applied as 6.7 material, thanks!