From: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
To: zhuguangqing83@gmail.com
Cc: lukasz.luba@arm.com, quentin.perret@arm.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net,
pavel@ucw.cz, len.brown@intel.com, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
zhuguangqing <zhuguangqing@xiaomi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM / EM: consult something about cpumask in em_dev_register_perf_domain
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 14:10:04 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201012131004.GB3366383@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201012130501.GA3366383@google.com>
On Monday 12 Oct 2020 at 14:05:01 (+0100), Quentin Perret wrote:
> > 3, The third question is, how can we ensure cpu_dev as follows is not
> > NULL? If we can't ensure that, maybe we should add a check before using
> > it.
> > /kernel/power/energy_model.c
> > 174) static int em_create_pd(struct device *dev, int nr_states,
> > 175) struct em_data_callback *cb, cpumask_t *cpus)
> > 176) {
> > 199) if (_is_cpu_device(dev))
> > 200) for_each_cpu(cpu, cpus) {
> > 201) cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
> > 202) cpu_dev->em_pd = pd;
> > 203) }
>
> And that should not be necessary as we check for the !dev case at the
> top of em_dev_register_perf_domain(). Or were you thinking about
> something else?
Oh I think I read that one wrong, but the conclusion should be the same,
at least on Arm64 -- all _possible_ CPUs should be registered early
enough for that not to be an issue.
Did you observe anything wrong there for your use-case?
Thanks,
Quentin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-12 13:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-12 12:41 [PATCH] PM / EM: consult something about cpumask in em_dev_register_perf_domain zhuguangqing83
2020-10-12 13:05 ` Quentin Perret
2020-10-12 13:10 ` Quentin Perret [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-10-13 3:40 zhuguangqing83
2020-10-13 15:20 ` Quentin Perret
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=20201012131004.GB3366383@google.com \
--to=qperret@google.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukasz.luba@arm.com \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=quentin.perret@arm.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=zhuguangqing83@gmail.com \
--cc=zhuguangqing@xiaomi.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.