Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1390980 > unrolled thread

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] cpufreq: governor: support scheduler cpufreq callbacks on remote CPUs

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] cpufreq: governor: support scheduler cpufreq  callbacks on remote CPUs Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> - 2016-04-29 12:40 +0200
    Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] cpufreq: governor: support scheduler cpufreq callbacks on remote CPUs "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> - 2016-04-29 13:20 +0200
      Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] cpufreq: governor: support scheduler cpufreq  callbacks on remote CPUs Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@linaro.org> - 2016-05-06 23:00 +0200

#1390980 — Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] cpufreq: governor: support scheduler cpufreq callbacks on remote CPUs

On 19-04-16, 19:39, Steve Muckle wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c
> index 20f0a4e114d1..429d3a5b9866 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c
> @@ -248,6 +248,20 @@ static void dbs_irq_work(struct irq_work *irq_work)
>  	schedule_work_on(smp_processor_id(), &policy_dbs->work);
>  }
>  
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> +static inline void dbs_irq_work_queue(struct policy_dbs_info *policy_dbs,
> +				      int cpu)
> +{
> +	irq_work_queue_on(&policy_dbs->irq_work, cpu);
> +}
> +#else
> +static inline void dbs_irq_work_queue(struct policy_dbs_info *policy_dbs,
> +				      int cpu)
> +{
> +	irq_work_queue(&policy_dbs->irq_work);
> +}
> +#endif

Any clue, why we don't have a non-SMP version of irq_work_queue_on(), Which can
simply call irq_work_queue() ?

-- 
viresh

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1391014 — Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] cpufreq: governor: support scheduler cpufreq callbacks on remote CPUs

On Friday, April 29, 2016 04:08:16 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 19-04-16, 19:39, Steve Muckle wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c
> > index 20f0a4e114d1..429d3a5b9866 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c
> > @@ -248,6 +248,20 @@ static void dbs_irq_work(struct irq_work *irq_work)
> >  	schedule_work_on(smp_processor_id(), &policy_dbs->work);
> >  }
> >  
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> > +static inline void dbs_irq_work_queue(struct policy_dbs_info *policy_dbs,
> > +				      int cpu)
> > +{
> > +	irq_work_queue_on(&policy_dbs->irq_work, cpu);
> > +}
> > +#else
> > +static inline void dbs_irq_work_queue(struct policy_dbs_info *policy_dbs,
> > +				      int cpu)
> > +{
> > +	irq_work_queue(&policy_dbs->irq_work);
> > +}
> > +#endif
> 
> Any clue, why we don't have a non-SMP version of irq_work_queue_on(), Which can
> simply call irq_work_queue() ?

Because nobody else needs it?

But I agree that it would be nicer to add the stub to irq_work.h.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1396106

On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 01:21:24PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, April 29, 2016 04:08:16 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
...
> > Any clue, why we don't have a non-SMP version of irq_work_queue_on(), Which can
> > simply call irq_work_queue() ?
> 
> Because nobody else needs it?
> 
> But I agree that it would be nicer to add the stub to irq_work.h.

I had wondered the same myself and figured there had to be a good reason why it didn't exist.

But if not, and it's preferred to add it, I'll go ahead and so.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web