From: Hui Su <sh_def@163.com>
To: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
vschneid@redhat.com, kprateek.nayak@amd.com, baohua@kernel.org,
yu.c.chen@intel.com, yangyicong@hisilicon.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched/topology: Balance cluster static-key updates
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2026 13:05:47 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261022130547.250531-1-sh_def@163.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <94773ec2c845d88b291df265935342eb1a3c9f7e.camel@linux.intel.com>
> We should be able to combine with rcu_read_lock/unlock() and cpu_map walk
> for cpu_attach_domain(NULL, &def_root_domain, i) below.
> So we do the rcu and cpu_map walk operation once in this function
> instead of doing it twice.
>
> Moving the dec after the detach loop should be safe. It only say
> that a cluster domain exists, and cluster code that will still test
> for actual SD_CLUSTER domain flag on the relevant domain.
>
> I will also suggest that this fix be backported to the stable kernels
> (cc stable@vger.kernel.org).
Hi Tim,
Agreed. Combining the cluster check with the existing detach loop avoids
the extra CPU mask walk and RCU read-side section.
I'll make this change in v3, move the static-key decrement after the
detach loop, and add Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org as suggested.
Thanks for the review!
Hui
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-22 4:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-21 4:38 Hui Su
2026-10-21 5:28 ` Kayra Cizmeci
2026-10-21 18:19 ` Tim Chen
2026-10-22 4:05 ` Hui Su [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20261022130547.250531-1-sh_def@163.com \
--to=sh_def@163.com \
--cc=baohua@kernel.org \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=yangyicong@hisilicon.com \
--cc=yu.c.chen@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®