On 01/23/24 08:58, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 1/23/24 1:47 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 10:42:20PM +0000, Qais Yousef wrote: > >> The logic in blk_mq_complete_need_ipi() assumes SMP systems where all > >> CPUs have equal capacities > > > > What is a capacity here? > > It seems to be the chosen word to describe the performance potential of > the core in question, we use it elsewhere in the kernel. But yes, could > do with a bit more of an explanation. Is referring to it as compute capacity makes it clearer? Sorry I thought that's a common term. > > >> + return arch_scale_cpu_capacity(this_cpu) >= arch_scale_cpu_capacity(that_cpu); > > > > oerly long line here. This is consistent with similar long lines in the same file and it's more readable as one line. checkpatch doesn't complain about this being long; I think they look for 100 or 120 now. This is 86. > > > > Also pleas split patches for different subsystems. > > Yes please, the sched/topology thing should be a separate prep patch. Okay. I thought the norm to keep such small patches self contained as adding dead code followed by a one liner isn't always seen as better. But a split it is :) I'll give the sched/arm folks time to have a look before I post a new version. Thanks! -- Qais Yousef
