From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755978AbcEXMRX (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2016 08:17:23 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f45.google.com ([209.85.220.45]:34349 "EHLO mail-pa0-f45.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755962AbcEXMRV (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2016 08:17:21 -0400 Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 17:47:17 +0530 From: Viresh Kumar To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux PM list , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Srinivas Pandruvada Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cpufreq: stats: Walk online CPUs with CPU offline/online locked Message-ID: <20160524121717.GY17585@vireshk-i7> References: <19792191.esL3UuyORb@vostro.rjw.lan> <20160524045630.GP17585@vireshk-i7> <2500818.MtOb9b1ZsB@vostro.rjw.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2500818.MtOb9b1ZsB@vostro.rjw.lan> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 24-05-16, 14:13, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > I don't really get it why you don't like get/put_online_cpus() so much. Not that I don't like them, I just wanted to see if its possible to work without any additional locking. Anyway, so the first version of your patch did the get_online_cpus() around a bigger section of the code instead of just the for_each_online_cpu() loop. Should we change that? -- viresh