Re: [PATCH 7/9] lib/cpumask: add num_{possible,present,active}_cpus_{eq,gt,le}

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sat, 2021-11-27 at 19:57 -0800, Yury Norov wrote:
> Add num_{possible,present,active}_cpus_{eq,gt,le} and replace num_*_cpus()
> with one of new functions where appropriate. This allows num_*_cpus_*()
> to return earlier depending on the condition.
[]
> diff --git a/arch/arc/kernel/smp.c b/arch/arc/kernel/smp.c
[]
> @@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ void __init smp_prepare_cpus(unsigned int max_cpus)
>  	 * if platform didn't set the present map already, do it now
>  	 * boot cpu is set to present already by init/main.c
>  	 */
> -	if (num_present_cpus() <= 1)
> +	if (num_present_cpus_le(2))
>  		init_cpu_present(cpu_possible_mask);

?  is this supposed to be 2 or 1

> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/pcc-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/pcc-cpufreq.c
[]
> @@ -593,7 +593,7 @@ static int __init pcc_cpufreq_init(void)
>  		return ret;
>  	}
>  
> -	if (num_present_cpus() > 4) {
> +	if (num_present_cpus_gt(4)) {
>  		pcc_cpufreq_driver.flags |= CPUFREQ_NO_AUTO_DYNAMIC_SWITCHING;
>  		pr_err("%s: Too many CPUs, dynamic performance scaling disabled\n",
>  		       __func__);

It looks as if the present variants should be using the same values
so the _le test above with 1 changed to 2 looks odd.





[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Development]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Info]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Linux Media]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux