From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
To: Alireza Sanaee <alireza.sanaee@huawei.com>
Cc: <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<coresight@lists.linaro.org>, <dianders@chromium.org>,
<james.clark@linaro.org>, <krzk@kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
<linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org>, <linuxarm@huawei.com>,
<mark.rutland@arm.com>, <mike.leach@linaro.org>,
<robh@kernel.org>, <ruanjinjie@huawei.com>,
<saravanak@google.com>, <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>,
<suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] arch_topology: drop the use of cpu_node in the pr_info
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2025 12:12:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250718121238.00005121@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250718094848.587-3-alireza.sanaee@huawei.com>
On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 10:48:44 +0100
Alireza Sanaee <alireza.sanaee@huawei.com> wrote:
> Remove the use of cpu_node in the pr_info. When of_cpu_node_to_id fails,
> it may set a pointer, cpu_node, and the get_cpu_for_node function uses that
> pointer to log further in the fail scenario.
>
> Also, change the structure to exit early in fail scenarios which will
> help enabling code unification that follows in this series.
So this patch is the trade off to the unification. Some small
amount of info in the info message is lost. To me that looks
fine, but others may disagree!
I assume the motivation for not just leaving this one alone is
we ultimately need the flexible handler for the SMT series?
>
> Signed-off-by: Alireza Sanaee <alireza.sanaee@huawei.com>
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>
> ---
> drivers/base/arch_topology.c | 11 ++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> index 1037169abb45..6fafd86f608a 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> @@ -481,12 +481,13 @@ static int __init get_cpu_for_node(struct device_node *node)
> return -1;
>
> cpu = of_cpu_node_to_id(cpu_node);
> - if (cpu >= 0)
> - topology_parse_cpu_capacity(cpu_node, cpu);
> - else
> - pr_info("CPU node for %pOF exist but the possible cpu range is :%*pbl\n",
> - cpu_node, cpumask_pr_args(cpu_possible_mask));
> + if (cpu < 0) {
> + pr_info("CPU node exist but the possible cpu range is :%*pbl\n",
> + cpumask_pr_args(cpu_possible_mask));
> + return cpu;
> + }
>
> + topology_parse_cpu_capacity(cpu_node, cpu);
> return cpu;
> }
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-18 11:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-18 9:48 [PATCH v3 0/6] Refactoring finding CPU phandles in DT Alireza Sanaee
2025-07-18 9:48 ` [PATCH v3 1/6] of: add infra for finding CPU id from phandle Alireza Sanaee
2025-07-18 11:10 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-07-21 0:30 ` Rob Herring (Arm)
2025-07-18 9:48 ` [PATCH v3 2/6] arch_topology: drop the use of cpu_node in the pr_info Alireza Sanaee
2025-07-18 11:12 ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2025-07-18 9:48 ` [PATCH v3 3/6] arch_topology: update CPU map to use of_cpu_phandle_to_id Alireza Sanaee
2025-07-18 11:14 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-07-18 9:48 ` [PATCH v3 4/6] coresight: cti: Use of_cpu_phandle_to_id for grabbing CPU id Alireza Sanaee
2025-07-18 11:14 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-07-18 9:48 ` [PATCH v3 5/6] coresight: Use of_cpu_phandle_to_id for grabbing CPU ID Alireza Sanaee
2025-07-18 12:59 ` Mike Leach
2025-07-18 9:48 ` [PATCH v3 6/6] perf/arm-dsu: refactor cpu id retrieval via new API of_cpu_phandle_to_id Alireza Sanaee
2025-07-18 11:15 ` Jonathan Cameron
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=20250718121238.00005121@huawei.com \
--to=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=alireza.sanaee@huawei.com \
--cc=coresight@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dianders@chromium.org \
--cc=james.clark@linaro.org \
--cc=krzk@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mike.leach@linaro.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=ruanjinjie@huawei.com \
--cc=saravanak@google.com \
--cc=shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.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 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).