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

Groups > linux.kernel > #1581825 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH v2 6/9] arm, arm64: factorize common cpu capacity default code

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: [PATCH v2 6/9] arm, arm64: factorize common cpu capacity default code Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org> - 2017-02-16 00:20 +0100
    Re: [PATCH v2 6/9] arm, arm64: factorize common cpu capacity default  code Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> - 2017-02-16 01:00 +0100

#1581825 — Re: [PATCH v2 6/9] arm, arm64: factorize common cpu capacity default code

On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 8:28 AM, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 09:25:22AM +0000, Juri Lelli wrote:
>> arm and arm64 share lot of code relative to parsing CPU capacity
>> information from DT, using that information for appropriate scaling and
>> exposing a sysfs interface for chaging such values at runtime.
>>
>> Factorize such code in a common place (driver/base/arch_topology.c) in
>> preparation for further additions.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
>> Suggested-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
>> Suggested-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
>> Cc: Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
>> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
>> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>
>> ---
>>
>> Changes from v1:
>>  - keep the original GPLv2 header
>> ---
>>  arch/arm/Kconfig             |   1 +
>>  arch/arm/kernel/topology.c   | 213 ++------------------------------------
>>  arch/arm64/Kconfig           |   1 +
>>  arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c | 219 +--------------------------------------
>>  drivers/base/Kconfig         |   8 ++
>>  drivers/base/Makefile        |   1 +
>>  drivers/base/arch_topology.c | 237 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  7 files changed, 257 insertions(+), 423 deletions(-)
>>  create mode 100644 drivers/base/arch_topology.c
>
> Ah, so you want _me_ to maintain this, ok, I better review it...
>
>> --- a/drivers/base/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/base/Kconfig
>> @@ -339,4 +339,12 @@ config CMA_ALIGNMENT
>>
>>  endif
>>
>> +config GENERIC_ARCH_TOPOLOGY
>> +     bool
>> +     help
>> +       Enable support for architectures common topology code: e.g., parsing
>> +       CPU capacity information from DT, usage of such information for
>> +       appropriate scaling, sysfs interface for changing capacity values at
>> +          runtime.
>
> Mix of spaces and tabs :(
>
>> +
>>  endmenu
>> diff --git a/drivers/base/Makefile b/drivers/base/Makefile
>> index f2816f6ff76a..397e5c344e6a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/base/Makefile
>> +++ b/drivers/base/Makefile
>> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_BUS) += soc.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_PINCTRL) += pinctrl.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_DEV_COREDUMP) += devcoredump.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_MSI_IRQ_DOMAIN) += platform-msi.o
>> +obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_ARCH_TOPOLOGY) += arch_topology.o
>>
>>  obj-y                        += test/
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..c1dd430adad2
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,237 @@
>> +/*
>> + * driver/base/arch_topology.c - Arch specific cpu topology information
>
> No need to keep the filename in the file, you know what it is called :)
>
>> + *
>> + * Copyright (C) 2016, ARM Ltd.
>> + * Written by: Juri Lelli, ARM Ltd.
>> + *
>> + * This file is subject to the terms and conditions of the GNU General Public
>> + * License.  See the file "COPYING" in the main directory of this archive
>> + * for more details.
>
> So, v2 only?  Please be specific.  Even better yet, use a SPDX header if
> you want to, those are always nice.

Sorry to hijack this thread, but you're recommending SPDX now? You
seemed pretty negative on it last time it came up[1]. Or was that just
in context of the churn of converting existing files? Personally, I
like the use of SPDX tags over free form license text and would like
to encourage it for dts files.

Rob

[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/2/5/65

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1582070 — Re: [PATCH v2 6/9] arm, arm64: factorize common cpu capacity default code

On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 05:17:05PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 8:28 AM, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >> + *
> >> + * Copyright (C) 2016, ARM Ltd.
> >> + * Written by: Juri Lelli, ARM Ltd.
> >> + *
> >> + * This file is subject to the terms and conditions of the GNU General Public
> >> + * License.  See the file "COPYING" in the main directory of this archive
> >> + * for more details.
> >
> > So, v2 only?  Please be specific.  Even better yet, use a SPDX header if
> > you want to, those are always nice.
> 
> Sorry to hijack this thread, but you're recommending SPDX now? You
> seemed pretty negative on it last time it came up[1]. Or was that just
> in context of the churn of converting existing files?

It was in the context of someone trying to tell someone else to do the
work for them of converting all of the existing files to use SPDX.  I've
never refused a patch from someone adding SPDX identifiers to the
kernel, in fact, _I'm_ the only one that has ever used such an
identifier on a kernel file :)

> Personally, I like the use of SPDX tags over free form license text
> and would like to encourage it for dts files.

Sure, go ahead, I'd encourage it.

thanks,

greg k-h

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web