From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from linux.microsoft.com (linux.microsoft.com [13.77.154.182]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 187CF1C3C01; Mon, 10 Feb 2025 09:53:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=13.77.154.182 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1739181206; cv=none; b=uMPN/+gj/NG8qMcUZ6PgBBhitGYF1UCLWt2M/8shOp7IpJTE8N2Y0I5nO5fuUj8qZbyoCbyFkeMGheDIp7+WuvaRKa/TpXbCrbUVqoEcm4w9g/eIGXRsNdLtGYgR+qbRZAE+sNi2b2gu1y2c84MCCRz968lBWDAsjytzo80c07w= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1739181206; c=relaxed/simple; bh=IO+O6EUi+uAuGXL49mw0amt+smHLueMfx2555wz9A3Y=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:From:To:Cc:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=uryKQP0sIkCpDA2SeHxQY67rwWsd38W3Zx233Nu+KNqaZNo0RtBfbEgxq+7FHT2Rb07/DiM6EvpoINczAdvL/9vxDT44EHpuY+LU4TLGeTbDywNeBRsm1+psKRPkmg1AWKcMbcME1ZvSSRT4trnv5ZZVSLvqVOdzRS8y8lXrz8Y= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.microsoft.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.microsoft.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.microsoft.com header.i=@linux.microsoft.com header.b=ovGWKNYZ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=13.77.154.182 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.microsoft.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.microsoft.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.microsoft.com header.i=@linux.microsoft.com header.b="ovGWKNYZ" Received: from [10.95.84.73] (unknown [167.220.238.9]) by linux.microsoft.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BAF3A210733E; Mon, 10 Feb 2025 01:53:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 linux.microsoft.com BAF3A210733E DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.microsoft.com; s=default; t=1739181204; bh=ul4PqToDU4EOqIEkhiabbprEgPldGXOLOtdJ7Wxw19U=; h=Date:Subject:From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=ovGWKNYZqPdKyurIannMR1Ek323hBTUtkGTmWdt17z23who+oJ5ArrYzTL1mPJ+cm T4OsQOWgOrcq1mcJPCRU0fRwBmDyOBrSAcB9RY0iuQTupVPkU76azAJUS8cuvIeSui OpwOpMKcS6EfvByhmqs49BFTUe0dLy3JrINuz+Jk= Message-ID: Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 15:23:19 +0530 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] sched/topology: Enable topology_span_sane check only for debug builds From: Naman Jain To: K Prateek Nayak , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Juri Lelli , Vincent Guittot , Dietmar Eggemann , Steven Rostedt , Ben Segall , Mel Gorman , Valentin Schneider Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Steve Wahl , Saurabh Singh Sengar , srivatsa@csail.mit.edu, Michael Kelley , namjain@linux.microsoft.com References: <20250203114738.3109-1-namjain@linux.microsoft.com> Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 2/5/2025 12:53 PM, Naman Jain wrote: > > > On 2/5/2025 12:50 PM, K Prateek Nayak wrote: >> Hello Naman, >> >> On 2/3/2025 5:17 PM, Naman Jain wrote: >>> From: Saurabh Sengar >>> >>> On a x86 system under test with 1780 CPUs, topology_span_sane() takes > > <.> > >>>   { >>>       int i = cpu + 1; >>> +    /* Skip the topology sanity check for non-debug, as it is a >>> time- consuming operatin */ >> >> s/operatin/operation/ >> >>> +    if (!sched_debug()) { >>> +        pr_info_once("%s: Skipping topology span sanity check. Use >>> `sched_verbose` boot parameter to enable it.\n", >> >> This could be broken down as follows: >> >>          pr_info_once("%s: Skipping topology span sanity check." >>                   " Use `sched_verbose` boot parameter to enable it.\n", >>                   __func__); >> >> Running: >> >>      grep -r -A 5 "pr_info(.*[^;,]$" kernel/ >> >> gives similar usage across kernel/*. Apart from those nits, feel >> free to add: >> >> Tested-by: K Prateek Nayak # x86 >> >> if the future version does not change much. >> > > Hello Prateek, > Thanks for reviewing and testing this. I'll make changes based on your > feedback in next version. > > Regards, > Naman > Hi Prateek, After breaking down the print msg based on your suggestion, checkpatch gives a warning. There are no warnings reported with current version of change. Even the fix suggested by checkpatch is aligned to what we have right now. So I'll keep it like this, not push further changes as of now and wait for the maintainers to pick the patch. WARNING: quoted string split across lines #57: FILE: kernel/sched/topology.c:2365: + pr_info_once("%s: Skipping topology span sanity check." + " Use `sched_verbose` boot parameter to enable it.\n", total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 14 lines checked Regards, Naman