Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:206:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 6csp3447317pxj; Tue, 11 May 2021 04:53:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz90cxz8bLI8ZYtNNKIBkbLNvpSCC8hNiiQEFwU9h2MVYk2UyWwa0HtMsaX+OpeD/igk1fM X-Received: by 2002:a92:cd8a:: with SMTP id r10mr26191879ilb.282.1620733988369; Tue, 11 May 2021 04:53:08 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1620733988; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=EJnbHL+QWaNqCUUZG+uJ7FFpFK59Wjs+Xr2lYWu8qqg8mHJNYMuxy/puDtkCkzRry6 7TF7ppyE9OsdN+tUhls6jxzPzNo8U/6fl1A/09Gph1eIsC7IKuac4rBOaYkr/hwdAwn9 OKeBCm1tj9UqTzntJiyB7DWySCn0K+Z5CJlasS1XDEz1LzfYgtRcAsV6VRTGgDbbwglk OLP6hbb4sPmGMXoh8hTlcL3k1t2W2bEGba/AAbStwqO5vQQpDDl7QXf9FQ8xauO+Ivxm VsXMP6uwfrJQ4npiM4QGpSAjldaiDQiMVYOjSQqpFz3ifULgiVM5CEfWySDsM0C1X01A NG9w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from; bh=cseQ5jqCc+xiVOa9I0tpp6OKSfnyekfKYnn6/wFyUQ8=; b=zLHlFhp8ws4FGUuFPDANDCoJIkgLsgdpbuCj9GFtY29sOZ5Xxab8zSkI8OAabwHE7w 49iSTgyT4NR801/E1QHmSAi6oRjg1VIGQa4WY2A+dmm/Dz9xxdlO60HS1vwwuyGRCvvI YTlOM2t6YY1QUAteROxz7jVEVK3QWDon/JBCNGPPTtUhVnvcd6oi8QiQRpETtlpgePfz Zbc4Yd8Irpw274cxQxwUcMzEVmpus/0zgM2vjWla91OwnarPd/8T1VMC853usyCYKKF3 2jMjNNuDkDf6igfaMLBeYyrR0LHX8IGFaxr/N95W53u8EEFcC5AIPGym9cHFgQBVx/gl +T6Q== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=arm.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id d1si21575759ilg.93.2021.05.11.04.52.56; Tue, 11 May 2021 04:53:08 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=arm.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231488AbhEKLwx (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 11 May 2021 07:52:53 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:45968 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231276AbhEKLwx (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 May 2021 07:52:53 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCAC4D6E; Tue, 11 May 2021 04:51:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e113632-lin (usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2B0813F719; Tue, 11 May 2021 04:51:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Valentin Schneider To: Srikar Dronamraju , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra Cc: LKML , Mel Gorman , Rik van Riel , Srikar Dronamraju , Thomas Gleixner , Vincent Guittot , Dietmar Eggemann , Gautham R Shenoy , Parth Shah , Aubrey Li Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/8] sched/idle: Move busy_cpu accounting to idle callback In-Reply-To: <20210506164543.90688-7-srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20210506164543.90688-1-srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20210506164543.90688-7-srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 11 May 2021 12:51:41 +0100 Message-ID: <87tun91oaa.mognet@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 06/05/21 22:15, Srikar Dronamraju wrote: > diff --git a/kernel/sched/topology.c b/kernel/sched/topology.c > index 8db40c8a6ad0..00e4669bb241 100644 > --- a/kernel/sched/topology.c > +++ b/kernel/sched/topology.c > @@ -647,6 +647,7 @@ DEFINE_PER_CPU(int, sd_llc_id); > #ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_SMT > DEFINE_PER_CPU(int, smt_id); > #endif > +DEFINE_PER_CPU(int, is_idle); This + patch 8 immediately reminds me of Aubrey's patch: http://lore.kernel.org/r/1615872606-56087-1-git-send-email-aubrey.li@intel.com last I looked it seemed OK, even the test bot seems happy. Aubrey, did you have any more work to do on that one (other than rebasing)? > DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct sched_domain_shared __rcu *, sd_llc_shared); > DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct sched_domain __rcu *, sd_numa); > DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct sched_domain __rcu *, sd_asym_packing); > @@ -673,6 +674,7 @@ static void update_top_cache_domain(int cpu) > #ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_SMT > per_cpu(smt_id, cpu) = cpumask_first(cpu_smt_mask(cpu)); > #endif > + per_cpu(is_idle, cpu) = 1; > rcu_assign_pointer(per_cpu(sd_llc_shared, cpu), sds); > > sd = lowest_flag_domain(cpu, SD_NUMA); > -- > 2.18.2