B1;2802;0cOn Thu, 8 Sep 2016, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
> From: Tim Chen <[email protected]>
$subject: x86, cpu: provide a function topology_num_packages to enumerate
#packages
- we switched to the prefix scheme 'x86/subsys'. Please use this.
- this is not related to x86/cpu. x86/topology is the proper prefix.
- Sentence after ':' starts with an uppercase letter.
- please make the subject line short and descriptive.
x86/topology: Provide topology_num_packages()
is completely sufficient, because it's entirely clear that it is a
function and the function name is self explaining.
> We compute the the number of active packages during boot and
> topology update.
We? We do not do anything..... and how is that information useful for the
reader?
> Provide a function to export this info for functions that need this
> topology info.
Well, it's obvious that a new function is going to be used by something
which needs it.
In changelogs/comments there is only one thing worse than superflous
informatioin: wrong information.
If you have nothing to say, then omit it instead of forcing the reader to
parse incoherent blurbs for nothing.
> int topology_update_package_map(unsigned int apicid, unsigned int cpu);
> +extern int topology_num_packages(void);
> extern int topology_phys_to_logical_pkg(unsigned int pkg);
> #else
> #define topology_max_packages() (1)
stub function for the !SMP case is missing....
Thanks,
tglx
