On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 10:06:17AM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> Enable small core scheduling as soon as we detect that we are in a
> system that supports thread group. Doing so would avoid a redundant
> check.
> 
> Cc: linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
> Cc: Michael Ellerman <micha...@au1.ibm.com>
> Cc: Nick Piggin <npig...@au1.ibm.com>
> Cc: Oliver OHalloran <olive...@au1.ibm.com>
> Cc: Nathan Lynch <nath...@linux.ibm.com>
> Cc: Michael Neuling <mi...@linux.ibm.com>
> Cc: Anton Blanchard <an...@au1.ibm.com>
> Cc: Gautham R Shenoy <e...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Cc: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <sva...@linux.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Srikar Dronamraju <sri...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

I don't see a problem with this.

However, since we are now going to be maintaining a single topology
structure, wouldn't it be better to collate all the changes being made
to the mask_functions/flags/names of this structure within a single
function so that it becomes easier to keep track of what all changes
are going into the topology and why are we doing it?


> ---
>  arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c | 12 ++++++------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c
> index 24529f6134aa..7d430fc536cc 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c
> @@ -892,6 +892,12 @@ static int init_big_cores(void)
>       }
> 
>       has_big_cores = true;
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_SMT
> +     pr_info("Big cores detected. Using small core scheduling\n");
> +     powerpc_topology[0].mask = smallcore_smt_mask;
> +#endif
> +
>       return 0;
>  }
> 
> @@ -1383,12 +1389,6 @@ void __init smp_cpus_done(unsigned int max_cpus)
> 
>       dump_numa_cpu_topology();
> 
> -#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_SMT
> -     if (has_big_cores) {
> -             pr_info("Big cores detected but using small core scheduling\n");
> -             powerpc_topology[0].mask = smallcore_smt_mask;
> -     }
> -#endif
>       set_sched_topology(powerpc_topology);
>  }
> 
> -- 
> 2.17.1
> 

Reply via email to