From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1758205AbcCCR7Y (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 3 Mar 2016 12:59:24 -0500
Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:60161 "EHLO
	Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1755484AbcCCR7X (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 3 Mar 2016 12:59:23 -0500
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 18:57:53 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Huang Rui <ray.huang@amd.com>
cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Robert Richter <rric@kernel.org>, Jacob Shin <jacob.w.shin@gmail.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Kan Liang <kan.liang@intel.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        spg_linux_kernel@amd.com, x86@kernel.org,
        Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>,
        Aravind Gopalakrishnan <Aravind.Gopalakrishnan@amd.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] perf/x86/amd/power: Add AMD accumulated power
 reporting mechanism
In-Reply-To: <20160303161809.GA2791@hr-amur2>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1603031850070.3597@nanos>
References: <1456992284-4808-1-git-send-email-ray.huang@amd.com> <1456992284-4808-3-git-send-email-ray.huang@amd.com> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1603030912560.3597@nanos> <20160303151357.GA2154@hr-amur2> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1603031619390.3597@nanos>
 <20160303161809.GA2791@hr-amur2>
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: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, 4 Mar 2016, Huang Rui wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 04:26:46PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > Why? You do a full for_each_online_cpu(i) loop after that, which does
> > exactly the same thing, right?
> >  
> 
> But looks like power_cpu_init cannot handle it if we don't take any
> action here.
> 
> e. g. 
> cpu_mask: 0000 and online mask: 1111 -> power_cpu_init(0) -> cpu_mask is still: 0000
> 
> topology_sibling_cpumask(0): 0011
> target: 1 (i. e. we cannot do cpumask_set_cpu(0, &cpu_mask))

Fair enough, but then you don't need the power_cpu_init() call at all.

But your loop does not cover anything beyond the first socket. So you need a
separate init function which does:

   for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
   	target = cpumask_first(topology_sibling_cpumask(cpu));
	if (!cpumask_test_cpu(target, cpumask))
	   	cpumask_set_cpu(target, cpumask);
   }	      
	   	
Thanks,

	tglx