B1;2802;0cOn Thu, 8 Sep 2016, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote: > From: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> $subject: x86, cpu: provide a function topology_num_packages to enumerate #packages - we switched to the prefix scheme 'x86/subsys'. Please use this. - this is not related to x86/cpu. x86/topology is the proper prefix. - Sentence after ':' starts with an uppercase letter. - please make the subject line short and descriptive. x86/topology: Provide topology_num_packages() is completely sufficient, because it's entirely clear that it is a function and the function name is self explaining. > We compute the the number of active packages during boot and > topology update. We? We do not do anything..... and how is that information useful for the reader? > Provide a function to export this info for functions that need this > topology info. Well, it's obvious that a new function is going to be used by something which needs it. In changelogs/comments there is only one thing worse than superflous informatioin: wrong information. If you have nothing to say, then omit it instead of forcing the reader to parse incoherent blurbs for nothing. > int topology_update_package_map(unsigned int apicid, unsigned int cpu); > +extern int topology_num_packages(void); > extern int topology_phys_to_logical_pkg(unsigned int pkg); > #else > #define topology_max_packages() (1) stub function for the !SMP case is missing.... Thanks, tglx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
