Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200707180800.549b561b@canb.auug.org.au> <2f85f3c4-a58b-f225-a533-86e209a4651c@infradead.org>
 <7ae1c7e3-ce8d-836b-1ae7-d4d00bd8f95c@broadcom.com>
In-Reply-To: <7ae1c7e3-ce8d-836b-1ae7-d4d00bd8f95c@broadcom.com>
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 8 Jul 2020 08:16:00 +0530
Message-ID: <CAOh2x=nGvuzicr77y-X5u8FWP7_G_UGosvdmtns01VCgtM_s=g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Jul 7 (scsi/lpfc/lpfc_init.c)
To:     James Smart <james.smart@broadcom.com>
Cc:     Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
        dick kennedy <dick.kennedy@broadcom.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi James,

On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 11:43 PM James Smart <james.smart@broadcom.com> wrote:
>
> On 7/7/2020 10:09 AM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > On 7/7/20 1:08 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> Changes since 20200706:
> >>
> > on i386:
> >
> > when CONFIG_ACPI is not set/enabled:
> >
> >
> > ../drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_init.c:1265:15: error: implicit declaration of function 'get_cpu_idle_time'; did you mean 'get_cpu_device'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> >
> >
> > The cpufreq people want justification for using

I am one of cpufreq people :)

> > get_cpu_idle_time().  Please see
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-scsi/20200707030943.xkocccy6qy2c3hrx@vireshk-i7/
> >
>
> The driver is using cpu utilization in order to choose between softirq
> or work queues in handling an interrupt. Less-utilized, softirq is used.
> higher utilized, work queue is used.  The utilization is checked
> periodically via a heartbeat.

I understand that you need to use this functionality, what I was
rather asking was
why do you need to use a routine that is for cpufreq related stuff only.

I also see that drivers/macintosh/rack-meter.c has its own
implementation for this.

What I would suggest is that, if required, we should add/move a
generic implementation
of this to another file (which is available to all) and then let
everyone use it.

--
viresh