From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752826Ab1LHT3z (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 8 Dec 2011 14:29:55 -0500
Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:44930 "EHLO mga09.intel.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1750817Ab1LHT3y (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 8 Dec 2011 14:29:54 -0500
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,351,1309762800"; 
   d="scan'208";a="85103792"
Subject: Re: [patch v3 5/6] sched, ttwu_queue: queue remote wakeups only
 when crossing cache domains
From: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
Reply-To: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
        Venki Pallipadi <venki@google.com>,
        Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.jf.intel.com>,
        "Shi, Alex" <alex.shi@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2011 11:34:18 -0800
In-Reply-To: <1323336544.17673.3.camel@twins>
References: <20111202010731.344451602@sbsiddha-desk.sc.intel.com>
	 <20111202010832.714874234@sbsiddha-desk.sc.intel.com>
	 <1322796864.4755.5.camel@marge.simson.net>
	 <1323275027.32012.114.camel@twins>
	 <1323285644.1984.55.camel@sbsiddha-desk.sc.intel.com>
	 <1323336544.17673.3.camel@twins>
Organization: Intel Corp
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.0.3 (3.0.3-1.fc15) 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <1323372858.1984.119.camel@sbsiddha-desk.sc.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 2011-12-08 at 01:29 -0800, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-12-07 at 11:20 -0800, Suresh Siddha wrote:
> 
> > > +DEFINE_PER_CPU(int, sd_top_spr_id);
> > 
> > pkg_srid (shared resource id)?
> 
> How about sd_llc{,_id} ?

There is a reason why I didn't mention it ;)

It is not always LLC. In power-savings mode, we group the cores sharing
the power-domain (typically the whole package) irrespective of one more
multiple LLC's etc.

Anyways, it is just a name.

thanks,
suresh