Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] arm64: topology: Avoid the have_policy check
From: Ionela Voinescu
Date: Mon Dec 14 2020 - 07:59:07 EST
On Thursday 10 Dec 2020 at 21:59:22 (+0530), Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Every time I have stumbled upon this routine, I get confused with the
> way 'have_policy' is used and I have to dig in to understand why is it
> so. Here is an attempt to make it easier to understand, and hopefully it
> is an improvement.
>
> The 'have_policy' check was just an optimization to avoid writing
> to amu_fie_cpus in case we don't have to, but that optimization itself
> is creating more confusion than the real work. Lets just do that if all
> the CPUs support AMUs. It is much cleaner that way.
>
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> V2:
> - Skip the have_policy check altogether
> - Updated subject and log
>
> arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c | 20 ++++++--------------
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
> index f6faa697e83e..ebadc73449f9 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
> @@ -199,14 +199,14 @@ static int freq_inv_set_max_ratio(int cpu, u64 max_rate, u64 ref_rate)
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static inline bool
> +static inline void
> enable_policy_freq_counters(int cpu, cpumask_var_t valid_cpus)
> {
> struct cpufreq_policy *policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
>
> if (!policy) {
> pr_debug("CPU%d: No cpufreq policy found.\n", cpu);
> - return false;
> + return;
> }
>
> if (cpumask_subset(policy->related_cpus, valid_cpus))
> @@ -214,8 +214,6 @@ enable_policy_freq_counters(int cpu, cpumask_var_t valid_cpus)
> amu_fie_cpus);
>
> cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
> -
> - return true;
> }
>
> static DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(amu_fie_key);
> @@ -225,7 +223,6 @@ static int __init init_amu_fie(void)
> {
> bool invariance_status = topology_scale_freq_invariant();
> cpumask_var_t valid_cpus;
> - bool have_policy = false;
> int ret = 0;
> int cpu;
>
> @@ -245,17 +242,12 @@ static int __init init_amu_fie(void)
> continue;
>
> cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, valid_cpus);
> - have_policy |= enable_policy_freq_counters(cpu, valid_cpus);
> + enable_policy_freq_counters(cpu, valid_cpus);
> }
>
> - /*
> - * If we are not restricted by cpufreq policies, we only enable
> - * the use of the AMU feature for FIE if all CPUs support AMU.
> - * Otherwise, enable_policy_freq_counters has already enabled
> - * policy cpus.
> - */
> - if (!have_policy && cpumask_equal(valid_cpus, cpu_present_mask))
> - cpumask_or(amu_fie_cpus, amu_fie_cpus, valid_cpus);
> + /* Overwrite amu_fie_cpus if all CPUs support AMU */
> + if (cpumask_equal(valid_cpus, cpu_present_mask))
> + cpumask_copy(amu_fie_cpus, cpu_present_mask);
>
> if (!cpumask_empty(amu_fie_cpus)) {
> pr_info("CPUs[%*pbl]: counters will be used for FIE.",
> --
> 2.25.0.rc1.19.g042ed3e048af
>
Reviewed-by: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@xxxxxxx>
Thanks,
Ionela.