From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25883C47084 for ; Tue, 25 May 2021 09:53:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01C3A61431 for ; Tue, 25 May 2021 09:53:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232759AbhEYJyo (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 May 2021 05:54:44 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:54042 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232723AbhEYJyo (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 May 2021 05:54:44 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D22E8D6E; Tue, 25 May 2021 02:53:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e113632-lin (usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7DFDC3F719; Tue, 25 May 2021 02:53:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Valentin Schneider To: Beata Michalska Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, corbet@lwn.net, rdunlap@infradead.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] sched/topology: Rework CPU capacity asymmetry detection In-Reply-To: <20210524225508.GA14880@e120325.cambridge.arm.com> References: <20210524101617.8965-1-beata.michalska@arm.com> <20210524101617.8965-3-beata.michalska@arm.com> <87fsyc6mfz.mognet@arm.com> <20210524225508.GA14880@e120325.cambridge.arm.com> Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 10:53:07 +0100 Message-ID: <87a6oj6sxo.mognet@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org 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: >> > This patch also removes the additional -dflags- parameter used when >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> s/^/Also remove/ > I would kind of ... disagree. > All the commit msg is constructed using passive structure, the suggestion > would actually break that. And it does 'sound' bit imperative but I guess > that is subjective. I'd rather stay with impersonal structure (which is > applied through out the whole patchset). It's mainly about the 'This patch' formulation, some take exception to that :-) >> >> > building sched domains as the asymmetry flags are now being set >> > directly in sd_init. >> > >> >> Few nits below, but beyond that: >> >> Tested-by: Valentin Schneider >> Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider >> > Thanks a lot for the review and testing! > >> > +static inline int >> > +asym_cpu_capacity_classify(struct sched_domain *sd, >> > + const struct cpumask *cpu_map) >> > +{ >> > + int sd_asym_flags = SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY | SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY_FULL; >> > + struct asym_cap_data *entry; >> > + int asym_cap_count = 0; >> > + >> > + if (list_is_singular(&asym_cap_list)) >> > + goto leave; >> > + >> > + list_for_each_entry(entry, &asym_cap_list, link) { >> > + if (cpumask_intersects(sched_domain_span(sd), 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)) { >> > + sd_asym_flags &= ~SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY_FULL; >> > + if (asym_cap_count > 1) >> > + break; >> > + } >> >> Readability nit: That could be made into an else if (). > It could but then this way the -comment- gets more exposed. > But that might be my personal perception so I can change that. As always those are quite subjective! Methink something like this would still draw attention to the offline case: /* * Count how many unique capacities this domain covers. If a * capacity isn't covered, we need to check if any CPU with * that capacity is actually online, otherwise it can be * ignored. */ if (cpumask_intersects(sched_domain_span(sd), entry->cpu_mask)) { ++asym_cap_count; } else if (cpumask_intersects(entry->cpu_mask, cpu_map)) { sd_asym_flags &= ~SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY_FULL; if (asym_cap_count > 1) break; }