Received: by 10.192.165.156 with SMTP id m28csp501444imm; Mon, 16 Apr 2018 04:10:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4+wtXD+fQmkohUGCzaDBZsb1DzzxJWbvFoEgEr6C4HhsZ6cOuLynO2fsL86dZ9+v+Rp+pYJ X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:988b:: with SMTP id s11-v6mr3181845plp.306.1523877036139; Mon, 16 Apr 2018 04:10:36 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1523877036; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=c5ou8I9hDdjdgmeFO8q8YCbhOp5jEHMTOb0J63iJu5sQePnpF0buTPtxFOqpoAh+U4 rX+mSvv1PNVor3cZuoaXHUK+j9pVYx42e4K19uCtEJSW3ZSonrAZcsQqVqkXZNWSqIM4 I+BpJWWHoeqZBtMVKJnM+zbQmtzU2AvO9bMHCQvTX0kpo8i5j4ASp/Yvzn4pulTXTUNp B+s5Ep65dwdSFwuPANCYyAoYHd8b7BFiR0Pte+dizKa+DC5+oXAumhZsqlzRSu5GTXev RBqlEBdwH2YypgHvr5rKvjojrwSPxvCe4Y694WmklSi5r4g1RwpTeymDAMCBkjODJDiq rUAw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:arc-authentication-results; bh=D+ARnZcRvyDtPg0DLQrTPGhmPARexhPByXT5SR4/G+0=; b=J0W6TW/hZTtxH2fYqInTRtQjdnRLDjITi+g999/tbYmW+uTN3lvFLnLDGX/qKIk72j ToHl60ut+JWiUFEMabGTr4M8n+LRFnxoZpnovnMyJO2jlNmJA8C7zmJg9p0j7lnAAJ/z jQWELk250ghJ9LUzrzH0oxEnAt+qBoeBI99CpStHfSvpUv+1VBYsHHhyuhowf8ENXOmn 9M1m8j3nY4LiRyMa3q14GsanXLDlZ8SnEWND00mAHAGLFSIL+HpnFIoEl9G5bGW6ZArT RvYCNrBERErrZQhnEL9221sdr4Jcr5ZqWMGgnryKutFu3Wm+qanHv86lR6yjEpbZDEWq hDDw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id q12-v6si7624884pll.467.2018.04.16.04.10.21; Mon, 16 Apr 2018 04:10:36 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754236AbeDPJeq (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:34:46 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:56924 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752511AbeDPJep (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:34:45 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EF7C15B2; Mon, 16 Apr 2018 02:34:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e107533-lin (unknown [10.37.10.23]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BE9EF3F25D; Mon, 16 Apr 2018 02:34:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 10:34:31 +0100 From: Sudeep Holla To: Daniel Lezcano Cc: Viresh Kumar , edubezval@gmail.com, kevin.wangtao@linaro.org, leo.yan@linaro.org, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, javi.merino@kernel.org, rui.zhang@intel.com, daniel.thompson@linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Amit Daniel Kachhap , Sudeep Holla Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] thermal/drivers/cpu_cooling: Introduce the cpu idle cooling driver Message-ID: <20180416093431.GA27901@e107533-lin> References: <1522945005-7165-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> <1522945005-7165-7-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> <3f3b3b7a-3b74-aee2-2fac-f2759babe3f0@arm.com> <939f7943-feec-aaa2-3bd3-59a6618330c0@linaro.org> <20180416073729.GA4244@vireshk-i7> <0a3164f9-4738-e24e-6ed0-2c75024c304c@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0a3164f9-4738-e24e-6ed0-2c75024c304c@linaro.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 09:44:51AM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > On 16/04/2018 09:37, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > On 13-04-18, 13:47, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > >> Ok, noted. At the first glance, it should not be a problem. > > > > Why do you think it wouldn't be a problem ? > > Because we rely on the number to identify the cluster and flag it > 'processed'. The number itself is not important. > In that case, why can't cpu_possible_mask be used for simplicity if all you need is the tracking and that need not be grouped under the "cluster" banner. -- Regards, Sudeep