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 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BFEFCCF9E0 for ; Mon, 27 Oct 2025 17:15:17 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Content-Type:MIME-Version: Message-ID:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=a0Kmg0M/pihg+3mchefRKJW/8qhO0EXT2ncDeCzUrSc=; b=KxZ9RrPQlCxXozP9OHnQ27SBaB Ptt+Q0ChL7MjgHIYufgqQmkUu3uebOP0PLsTZENVCV/5Y8sjkBSMaEtxI8vwvcDO3eKmyY1YOzoUT gEuFblthZAJiqMys+dUAvp5mK0wwvuUEOByA2K9Gbc3+zN6IdeT/OSCTMfLJOeDd47WP4SK3/iaU6 8Rt3pSgfWz8dFzShymLMMQ4aft10ra0x9lENmnZJAbmXclsh0HblkNjFpP7y2oemJoTn5qCpvJi+Z 2Nn6vPKb2e5q8ZezIVOygXKg4jEIwYOTPONHptxGNKiWYZqVkNDWO7zTEtTsAq6fsuOQfNVcojJc6 3xsQWSOw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1vDQoJ-0000000EQFn-3XnT; Mon, 27 Oct 2025 17:15:11 +0000 Received: from galois.linutronix.de ([2a0a:51c0:0:12e:550::1]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1vDQoG-0000000EQDH-37oU for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 27 Oct 2025 17:15:10 +0000 From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1761585306; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=a0Kmg0M/pihg+3mchefRKJW/8qhO0EXT2ncDeCzUrSc=; b=S+1joJJKL5HOP2QI7bePmaQsErjZHts/8tAjGua3A3++P+uxwhzP6Fx+CgA+saMowyM/Un qF1s+8Z1CTSJc278sFPw14sZSSoNPm71h0PyF/0QKybtsp+jpWQPmjC4zruRYx0vkSIFvy UWhtf5ww4Zpghxxms4sRdmPlCamm85FHT9I1E+9CpPa2boPNMt2j3JjdgppUSlh1Sn1bNR FmzEyEDDyPeq7kQKP/vw2ziBPXIDOqE3QlkAYQCKJeOmJf5nSl66AotEtUGLuhrOdu3wzs JDiizpLx+fpfP8M8doVAcRU9Vj/rT8NqbqjYG4J6tCYaCDxF4BmEUlPc/ZDVMA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1761585306; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=a0Kmg0M/pihg+3mchefRKJW/8qhO0EXT2ncDeCzUrSc=; b=RCyckc7oww7LF/Ey96p7Gohn/JMg7811PjAJquXTWtNmny2y8jawDxqgoepfeTcokWQ1pv GYPaiP3kZRgFcxBg== To: Ulf Hansson , Ben Horgan Cc: "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Mark Rutland , Marc Zyngier , Maulik Shah , Sudeep Holla , Daniel Lezcano , Vincent Guittot , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] smp: Introduce a helper function to check for pending IPIs In-Reply-To: References: <20251020141718.150919-1-ulf.hansson@linaro.org> <20251020141718.150919-2-ulf.hansson@linaro.org> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2025 18:15:04 +0100 Message-ID: <874irkw9k7.ffs@tglx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20251027_101509_036041_7FF1E064 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 14.59 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Tue, Oct 21 2025 at 12:08, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On Mon, 20 Oct 2025 at 21:11, Ben Horgan wrote: >> >> Hi Ulf, >> >> Only a comment on the naming rather than a full review. >> >> On 10/20/25 15:17, Ulf Hansson wrote: >> > When governors used during cpuidle, tries to find the most optimal >> > idlestate for a CPU or a group of CPUs, they are known to quite often fail. >> > One reason for this, is that we are not taking into account whether there >> > has been an IPI scheduled for any of the CPUs that are affected by the >> > selected idlestate. >> > >> > To enable pending IPIs to be taken into account for cpuidle decisions, >> > let's introduce a new helper function, cpus_may_have_pending_ipi(). >> >> To me, "may" indicates permission, i.e. is allowed, rather than >> correctness. Would "likely" be better here, cpus_likely_have_pending_ipi()? > > Sure, that sounds better to me too. cpus_peek_for_pending_ipis() perhaps?