From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754396AbbETTCx (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 May 2015 15:02:53 -0400 Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:34623 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753779AbbETTCv (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 May 2015 15:02:51 -0400 Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 21:02:58 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Vikas Shivappa cc: Vikas Shivappa , x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, mingo@kernel.org, tj@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, Matt Fleming , "Auld, Will" , peter.zijlstra@intel.com, h.peter.anvin@intel.com, "Juvva, Kanaka D" , mtosatti@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] x86/intel_rdt: Add support for cache bit mask management In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <1431370976-31115-1-git-send-email-vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com> <1431370976-31115-4-git-send-email-vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (DEB 23 2013-08-11) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 20 May 2015, Vikas Shivappa wrote: > On Mon, 18 May 2015, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > On Mon, 18 May 2015, Vikas Shivappa wrote: > > > On Fri, 15 May 2015, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > > +static inline bool intel_rdt_update_cpumask(int cpu) > > > > > +{ > > > > > + } > > > > > > > > You must be kidding. > > > > > > the rapl and cqm use similar code. You want me to keep a seperate package > > > mask > > > for this code which not would be that frequent at all ? > > > > You find for everything a place where you copied your stuff from > > without thinking about it, right? > > > > Other people dessperately try to fix the cpu online times which are > > more and more interesting the larger the systems become. So it might > > be a good idea to come up with a proper fast implementation which can > > be used everywhere instead of blindly copying code. > > Ok , i can try to do this as a seperate patch after the cache allocation to Hell no. We do preparatory patches first. I'm not believing in 'can try' promises. > get a support for faster implementation for traversing package and cpus in the > packages which can be used by everyone. we would need to start from scratch > with having packagemask_t equivalent to cpumask_t. hope that is fair ? Yes, that's what I want to see. Thanks, tglx