linux-doc.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
To: Beata Michalska <beata.michalska@arm.com>
Cc: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
	mingo@redhat.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
	vincent.guittot@linaro.org, corbet@lwn.net,
	rdunlap@infradead.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] sched/topology: Rework CPU capacity asymmetry detection
Date: Wed, 26 May 2021 20:17:25 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1cae4fcc-d276-f66d-c094-35571233d923@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210526121546.GA13262@e120325.cambridge.arm.com>

On 26/05/2021 14:15, Beata Michalska wrote:
> On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 11:52:25AM +0200, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
>> On 25/05/2021 12:29, Beata Michalska wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 10:53:07AM +0100, Valentin Schneider wrote:
>>>> On 24/05/21 23:55, Beata Michalska wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 07:01:04PM +0100, Valentin Schneider wrote:
>>>>>> On 24/05/21 11:16, Beata Michalska wrote:

[...]

>> static inline int
>> asym_cpu_capacity_classify(struct sched_domain *sd, 
>>                            const struct cpumask *cpu_map)
>> {
>>         int sd_span_match = 0, cpu_map_match = 0, flags = 0; 
>>         struct asym_cap_data *entry;
>>
>>         list_for_each_entry(entry, &asym_cap_list, link) {
>>                 if (cpumask_intersects(sched_domain_span(sd), entry->cpu_mask))
>>                         ++sd_span_match;
>>                 else if (cpumask_intersects(cpu_map, entry->cpu_mask))
>>                         ++cpu_map_match;
>>         }
>>
>>         WARN_ON_ONCE(!sd_span_match);
>>
>>         if (sd_span_match > 1) { 
>>                 flags |= SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY;
>>                 if (!cpu_map_match)
>>                         flags |= SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY_FULL;
>>         }
>>
>>         return flags;
>> }
> So I planned to drop the list_is_singular check as it is needless really.
> Otherwise, I am not really convinced by the suggestion. I could add comments
> around current version to make it more ..... 'digestible' but I'd rather
> stay with it as it seems more compact to me (subjective).

You could pass in `const struct cpumask *sd_span` instead of `struct
sched_domain *sd` though. To make it clear that both masks are used to
compare against the cpumasks of the asym_cap_list entries.

 static inline int
-asym_cpu_capacity_classify(struct sched_domain *sd,
+asym_cpu_capacity_classify(const struct cpumask *sd_span,
 			   const struct cpumask *cpu_map)
 {
 	int sd_asym_flags = SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY | SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY_FULL;
@@ -1377,14 +1378,14 @@ asym_cpu_capacity_classify(struct sched_domain *sd,
 		goto leave;
 
 	list_for_each_entry(entry, &asym_cap_list, link) {
-		if (cpumask_intersects(sched_domain_span(sd), entry->cpu_mask)) {
+		if (cpumask_intersects(sd_span, entry->cpu_mask)) {
 			++asym_cap_count;
 		} else {
 			/*
 			 * CPUs with given capacity might be offline
 			 * so make sure this is not the case
 			 */
-			if (cpumask_intersects(entry->cpu_mask, cpu_map)) {
+			if (cpumask_intersects(cpu_map, entry->cpu_mask)) {
 				sd_asym_flags &= ~SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY_FULL;
 				if (asym_cap_count > 1)
 					break;
@@ -1395,7 +1396,6 @@ asym_cpu_capacity_classify(struct sched_domain *sd,
 leave:
 	return asym_cap_count > 1 ? sd_asym_flags : 0;
 }
-#endif
 
 static inline struct asym_cap_data *
 asym_cpu_capacity_get_data(unsigned long capacity)
@@ -1589,6 +1589,7 @@ sd_init(struct sched_domain_topology_level *tl,
 	struct sd_data *sdd = &tl->data;
 	struct sched_domain *sd = *per_cpu_ptr(sdd->sd, cpu);
 	int sd_id, sd_weight, sd_flags = 0;
+	struct cpumask *sd_span;
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
 	/*
@@ -1636,10 +1637,11 @@ sd_init(struct sched_domain_topology_level *tl,
 #endif
 	};
 
-	cpumask_and(sched_domain_span(sd), cpu_map, tl->mask(cpu));
-	sd_id = cpumask_first(sched_domain_span(sd));
+	sd_span = sched_domain_span(sd);
+	cpumask_and(sd_span, cpu_map, tl->mask(cpu));
+	sd_id = cpumask_first(sd_span);
 
-	sd->flags |= asym_cpu_capacity_classify(sd, cpu_map);
+	sd->flags |= asym_cpu_capacity_classify(sd_span, cpu_map);
 	/*
 	 * Convert topological properties into behaviour.
 	 */

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-05-26 18:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-05-24 10:16 [PATCH v5 0/3] Rework CPU capacity asymmetry detection Beata Michalska
2021-05-24 10:16 ` [PATCH v5 1/3] sched/core: Introduce SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY_FULL sched_domain flag Beata Michalska
2021-05-24 10:16 ` [PATCH v5 2/3] sched/topology: Rework CPU capacity asymmetry detection Beata Michalska
2021-05-24 18:01   ` Valentin Schneider
2021-05-24 22:55     ` Beata Michalska
2021-05-24 23:19       ` Beata Michalska
2021-05-25  9:53       ` Valentin Schneider
2021-05-25 10:29         ` Beata Michalska
2021-05-26  9:52           ` Dietmar Eggemann
2021-05-26 12:15             ` Beata Michalska
2021-05-26 12:51               ` Beata Michalska
2021-05-26 18:17                 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2021-05-26 21:40                   ` Beata Michalska
2021-05-27 15:08                     ` Dietmar Eggemann
2021-05-27 17:07                       ` Beata Michalska
2021-06-02 17:17                         ` Dietmar Eggemann
2021-06-02 19:48                           ` Beata Michalska
2021-06-03  9:09                             ` Dietmar Eggemann
2021-06-03  9:24                               ` Beata Michalska
2021-05-26 18:17               ` Dietmar Eggemann [this message]
2021-05-26 21:43                 ` Beata Michalska
2021-05-27  7:03             ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-05-27 12:22               ` Dietmar Eggemann
2021-05-27 12:32                 ` Beata Michalska
2021-05-25  8:25   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2021-05-25  9:30     ` Beata Michalska
2021-05-25 11:59       ` Dietmar Eggemann
2021-05-25 14:04         ` Beata Michalska
2021-05-24 10:16 ` [PATCH v5 3/3] sched/doc: Update the CPU capacity asymmetry bits Beata Michalska

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1cae4fcc-d276-f66d-c094-35571233d923@arm.com \
    --to=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=beata.michalska@arm.com \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
    --cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).