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=-10.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 B622CC4361B for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2020 11:02:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EA8123A62 for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2020 11:02:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2389284AbgLRLB7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Dec 2020 06:01:59 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:42524 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1733218AbgLRLB7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Dec 2020 06:01:59 -0500 Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 11:01:15 +0000 From: Catalin Marinas To: Viresh Kumar Cc: Ionela Voinescu , Will Deacon , Vincent Guittot , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/3] arm64: topology: Avoid the have_policy check Message-ID: <20201218110114.GD5258@gaia> References: <5ffc7b9ed03c6301ac2f710f609282959491b526.1608010334.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> <20201217075732.blac5pbca7prmuum@vireshk-i7> <20201217105524.GA15336@gaia> <20201218042602.4ymy4fg2zxeo6p4n@vireshk-i7> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201218042602.4ymy4fg2zxeo6p4n@vireshk-i7> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 09:56:02AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 17-12-20, 10:55, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > Hi Viresh, > > > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 01:27:32PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > > On 15-12-20, 11:04, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > > > Every time I have stumbled upon this routine, I get confused with the > > > > way 'have_policy' is used and I have to dig in to understand why is it > > > > so. Here is an attempt to make it easier to understand, and hopefully it > > > > is an improvement. > > > > > > > > The 'have_policy' check was just an optimization to avoid writing > > > > to amu_fie_cpus in case we don't have to, but that optimization itself > > > > is creating more confusion than the real work. Lets just do that if all > > > > the CPUs support AMUs. It is much cleaner that way. > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Ionela Voinescu > > > > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar > > > > --- > > > > V3: > > > > - Added Reviewed by tag. > > > > > > Catalin, please pick the first two patches for 5.11. I will send the > > > last one separately later on. > > > > I haven't figured out whether these are fixes (a cover letter would > > help ;)). They look like generic improvements to me > > Right they are and since the merge window just opened I thought these > don't really need to wait for another full cycle to get in. Normally we freeze the arm64 tree around the -rc6 prior to the merging window to give the patches a bit of time in linux-next. This time around, given the holidays, Linus even stated that if not already in -next at 5.10, it won't be pulled: https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/12/13/290. So please re-post at -rc1 with the acks in place. -- Catalin