> 
>  int arch_update_cpu_topology(void)
>  {
> -     return numa_update_cpu_topology(true);
> +     int changed = topology_changed;
> +
> +     topology_changed = 0;
> +     return changed;
>  }
> 

Do we need Powerpc override for arch_update_cpu_topology() now?  That
topology_changed sometime back doesn't seem to have help. The scheduler
atleast now is neglecting whether the topology changed or not.

Also we can do away with the new topology_changed.

>  static void topology_work_fn(struct work_struct *work)
>  {
> -     rebuild_sched_domains();
> +     lock_device_hotplug();
> +     if (numa_update_cpu_topology(true))
> +             rebuild_sched_domains();
> +     unlock_device_hotplug();
>  }

Should this hunk be a separate patch by itself to say why
rebuild_sched_domains with a changelog that explains why it should be under
lock_device_hotplug? rebuild_sched_domains already takes cpuset_mutex. 
So I am not sure if we need to take device_hotplug_lock.

>  static DECLARE_WORK(topology_work, topology_work_fn);
> 
> -static void topology_schedule_update(void)
> +void topology_schedule_update(void)
>  {
> -     schedule_work(&topology_work);
> +     if (!topology_update_in_progress)
> +             schedule_work(&topology_work);
>  }
> 
>  static void topology_timer_fn(struct timer_list *unused)
>  {
> +     bool sdo = false;

Is sdo any abbrevation?

> +
> +     if (topology_scans < 1)
> +             bitmap_fill(cpumask_bits(&cpu_associativity_changes_mask),
> +                         nr_cpumask_bits);

Why do we need topology_scan? Just to make sure
cpu_associativity_changes_mask is populated only once?
cant we use a static bool inside the function for the same?


> +
>       if (prrn_enabled && cpumask_weight(&cpu_associativity_changes_mask))
> -             topology_schedule_update();
> -     else if (vphn_enabled) {
> +             sdo =  true;
> +     if (vphn_enabled) {

Any reason to remove the else above?

>               if (update_cpu_associativity_changes_mask() > 0)
> -                     topology_schedule_update();
> +                     sdo =  true;
>               reset_topology_timer();
>       }
> +     if (sdo)
> +             topology_schedule_update();
> +     topology_scans++;
>  }

Are the above two hunks necessary? Not getting how the current changes are
different from the previous.

-- 
Thanks and Regards
Srikar Dronamraju

Reply via email to