[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87v89ixkul.ffs@tglx>
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2023 11:45:06 +0100
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Russell King <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, loongarch@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev,
x86@...nel.org, linux-csky@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@...wei.com>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
jianyong.wu@....com, justin.he@....com,
James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/21] arch_topology: Make
register_cpu_capacity_sysctl() tolerant to late CPUs
On Tue, Nov 21 2023 at 13:43, Russell King wrote:
> ---
> If the offline CPUs thing is a problem for the tools that consume
> this value, we'd need to move cpu_capacity to be part of cpu.c's
> common_cpu_attr_groups. However, attempts to discuss this just end
> up in a black hole, so this is a non-starter. Thus, if this needs
> to be done, it can be done as a separate patch.
Offline CPUs have 0 capacity by definition....
Powered by blists - more mailing lists