From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 995D322D7A5; Mon, 27 Oct 2025 17:20:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761585619; cv=none; b=I3Gyv41nQsNPgAF1z7CPWaMV47XQzT52MOwxhWOugFsDVbGKeqB57JjH0m8wkGCcsrrRNTIZPCXqSZfGV5LfJ4v9Ubh5azGADpFGM37QT7c4PC4/r9P4vdPmv5G/p3tjfXE2/M4mTEBex5WQ+APJYj73hybrGBqLbokTTQjT0Os= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761585619; c=relaxed/simple; bh=8hHDJnAKQ7TkGYVWTB6uVUYjf8D1v5bl3mhnVF4y4sw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=UygcL/+FCL98X47fFNJ8kc5UuRlcRSuQOvgaQREo8DoHGQ23jEE3kG/DazRdIx+UfvDnUChr1I1NNoXspBRtEm9QjrXpMXY2R6bOl8f81wxPNh09bPxFeLj6SXm6JA7rqNGCOQQdXVlR6ixSeI4O4fbRJ8Ple3NJ1M2B8eM+cU0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=Y14ZqlD0; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=A42MOUxI; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="Y14ZqlD0"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="A42MOUxI" From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1761585616; 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=EL18DRmiuTWLATBe5Gs34HIgGkwAeVge3RkC2LhpsLg=; b=Y14ZqlD0EkXH4iXjM70FdXLZ+iOmw30C2f7uSB34GLPzWVrHPR6OXTNqwiVcy3+bZNKHkp 6K1KOrw6cVb9UR7MqjEoTKh821zZ8z3a+Pf5p2aA2Axnet/8ZauSCNdRYDrIlU4dJquAFd jKh+n99niLkinU17cVLbaOaySoruhIk8BMB89Pi5toNhruNW+EQiH1SVEZOrH354Y+Yt06 Viaw77hlRVAUvWKxKWJR+fynvTuYcuWFp9dNX4qtnWL1NQ0jwc+gwO+NZeRRKmA9lk5f6/ CLJS3BiWWLqaZmxUXQuZJvOkCI5iXQEhY2/B/fd6MmpzAlE4oYYVI+jxxZrMsw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1761585616; 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=EL18DRmiuTWLATBe5Gs34HIgGkwAeVge3RkC2LhpsLg=; b=A42MOUxIaJbK5VTM2nYXH7xNrbkEdlYKRkj/alxqESRm5Jg4OCECUkjGTLfYR5G4C0rGLJ SoYRkgVexCygZbBQ== To: Ulf Hansson , "Rafael J . Wysocki" Cc: 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, Ulf Hansson Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] smp: Introduce a helper function to check for pending IPIs In-Reply-To: <20251020141718.150919-2-ulf.hansson@linaro.org> References: <20251020141718.150919-1-ulf.hansson@linaro.org> <20251020141718.150919-2-ulf.hansson@linaro.org> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2025 18:20:15 +0100 Message-ID: <871pmow9bk.ffs@tglx> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Mon, Oct 20 2025 at 16:17, Ulf Hansson wrote: > When governors used during cpuidle, tries to find the most optimal When governors used during cpuidle trie to ... Both plural and no comma. > idlestate for a CPU or a group of CPUs, they are known to quite often fail. idle state > One reason for this, is that we are not taking into account whether there ...for this is, that they are not taking into account > 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(). s/let's// > Note that, the implementation is intentionally as lightweight as possible, > in favor of always providing the correct information. That sentence doesn't make sense. It's a snapshot and therefore can't provide the correct information. > For cpuidle decisions this is good enough. Thanks, tglx