From: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
To: mingo@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: sshegde@linux.ibm.com, kprateek.nayak@amd.com,
juri.lelli@redhat.com, vschneid@redhat.com,
dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, tj@kernel.org, rostedt@goodmis.org,
tglx@kernel.org, mgorman@suse.de, bsegall@google.com,
arighi@nvidia.com
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] topology: Introduce cpu_smt_mask for CONFIG_SCHED_SMT=n
Date: Wed, 6 May 2026 16:30:50 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260506110052.9974-2-sshegde@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260506110052.9974-1-sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
Define cpu_smt_mask in case of CONFIG_SCHED_SMT=n as cpumask_of that
CPU. With that config, it is expected that kernel treats each CPU
as individual core. Using cpumask_of(cpu) reflects that.
This would help to get rid of the ifdeffery that is spread across
the codebase since cpu_smt_mask is defined only in case of
CONFIG_SCHED_SMT=y.
Note: There is no arch today which defines cpu_smt_mask unconditionally.
So likely defining the cpu_smt_mask shouldn't lead redefintion errors.
Signed-off-by: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
---
include/linux/topology.h | 15 ++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/topology.h b/include/linux/topology.h
index 6575af39fd10..3a36fd1066fe 100644
--- a/include/linux/topology.h
+++ b/include/linux/topology.h
@@ -230,11 +230,24 @@ static inline int cpu_to_mem(int cpu)
#define topology_drawer_cpumask(cpu) cpumask_of(cpu)
#endif
-#if defined(CONFIG_SCHED_SMT) && !defined(cpu_smt_mask)
+/*
+ * Defining cpu_smt_mask as cpumask_of that CPU helps to get
+ * rid of lot of ifdeffery all around the codebase in case of
+ * CONFIG_SCHED_SMT=n. It just means there are no other siblings, which
+ * is what is expected.
+ */
+#if defined(CONFIG_SCHED_SMT)
+# if !defined(cpu_smt_mask)
static inline const struct cpumask *cpu_smt_mask(int cpu)
{
return topology_sibling_cpumask(cpu);
}
+# endif
+#else /* !CONFIG_SCHED_SMT */
+static inline const struct cpumask *cpu_smt_mask(int cpu)
+{
+ return cpumask_of(cpu);
+}
#endif
#ifndef topology_is_primary_thread
--
2.51.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-06 11:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-06 11:00 [PATCH 0/3] sched: Simplify ifdeffery around CONFIG_SCHED_SMT Shrikanth Hegde
2026-05-06 11:00 ` Shrikanth Hegde [this message]
2026-05-06 11:00 ` [PATCH 2/3] sched: Simplify ifdeffery around cpu_smt_mask Shrikanth Hegde
2026-05-11 12:53 ` Valentin Schneider
2026-05-11 14:37 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-05-11 18:46 ` Tejun Heo
2026-05-06 11:00 ` [PATCH 3/3] sched/fair: Add compile time check in fastpaths for CONFIG_SCHED_SMT=n Shrikanth Hegde
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=20260506110052.9974-2-sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
--to=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=arighi@nvidia.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@kernel.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.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