From: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@gmail.com>
To: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com>
Cc: Lingutla Chandrasekhar <clingutla@codeaurora.org>,
sudeep.holla@arm.com, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, will.deacon@arm.com,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, morten.rasmussen@arm.com,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, jeremy.linton@arm.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] arch_topology: Make cpu_capacity sysfs node as ready-only
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2019 10:57:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190307095750.GD29753@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190307093116.slvugyeos46kl3et@queper01-lin>
Hi,
On 07/03/19 09:31, Quentin Perret wrote:
> Hi Juri,
>
> On Thursday 07 Mar 2019 at 08:28:56 (+0100), Juri Lelli wrote:
> > There are cases in which this needs to be RW, as recently discussed
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20181123135807.GA14964@e107155-lin/
>
> Yeah there's that problem when you can't fix your DT ... But I guess
> this is a problem for _all_ values in the DT, not just capacities right ?
> But these other values, I'd expected they just can't be fixed from
> userspace most of the time, you just have to live with sub-optimal
> values. So I don't find it unreasonable to do that for capacities too.
>
> > IMHO, if the core_sibling assumption doesn't work in all cases, one
> > should be looking into fixing it, rather than making this RO.
>
> It's just that this thing keeps causing more harm than it helps IMO.
> It's quite severely broken ATM, and it prevents us from assuming
> 'stable' capacity values in places were we'd like to do so (e.g. EAS).
>
> And I'm not aware of a single platform where this is used. So, I'm
> personally all for removing the write capability if we can.
If people think it's best to simply make this RO, I won't be against it.
Just pointed out a conversation we recently had. Guess we could also
make it RW again (properly) in the future if somebody complains.
Best,
- Juri
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-07 9:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20190306152254.GB19434@e105550-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
2019-03-06 15:27 ` [PATCH v1] arch_topology: Make cpu_capacity sysfs node as ready-only Lingutla Chandrasekhar
2019-03-07 7:28 ` Juri Lelli
2019-03-07 9:31 ` Quentin Perret
2019-03-07 9:57 ` Juri Lelli [this message]
2019-03-07 12:14 ` Quentin Perret
2019-03-07 15:04 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-03-07 15:19 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-03-08 11:45 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-03-08 12:38 ` [PATCH v2] " Lingutla Chandrasekhar
2019-03-27 10:56 ` 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=20190307095750.GD29753@localhost.localdomain \
--to=juri.lelli@gmail.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=clingutla@codeaurora.org \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jeremy.linton@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
--cc=quentin.perret@arm.com \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=will.deacon@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