From: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
To: Li kunyu <kunyu@nfschina.com>,
tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de,
dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, hpa@zytor.com,
rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, tony.luck@intel.com,
tim.gardner@canonical.com, boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, ray.huang@amd.com, paulmck@kernel.org,
ionela.voinescu@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: topology_update_package_map function doesn't use the return value
Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2022 10:44:22 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <35202f2acb9367b926b2066af3f7f4731a9c5f47.camel@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220606122316.291022-1-kunyu@nfschina.com>
On Mon, 2022-06-06 at 20:23 +0800, Li kunyu wrote:
> topology_update_package_map function could remove the return value, and
> it could remove the BUG_ON check.
>
> Signed-off-by: Li kunyu <kunyu@nfschina.com>
As far as I can tell, topology_update_package_map() should always succeed and return 0.
Either there is an existing mapping of the physical package to a logical
package id and we don't have to do anything, or we assign a new logical package id to this
physical package id that doesn't have a mapping.
So I agree that checking for the failure and non-zero return of topology_update_package_map()
is useless.
Likewise, I think topology_update_die_map() should always succeed and we can remove
checking of its return value.
Reviewed-by: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/topology.h | 6 +++---
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c | 2 +-
> arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c | 3 +--
> 3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/topology.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/topology.h
> index 458c891a8273..eabfb44b63ed 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/topology.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/topology.h
> @@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ static inline int topology_max_smt_threads(void)
> return __max_smt_threads;
> }
>
> -int topology_update_package_map(unsigned int apicid, unsigned int cpu);
> +void topology_update_package_map(unsigned int apicid, unsigned int cpu);
> int topology_update_die_map(unsigned int dieid, unsigned int cpu);
> int topology_phys_to_logical_pkg(unsigned int pkg);
> int topology_phys_to_logical_die(unsigned int die, unsigned int cpu);
> @@ -144,8 +144,8 @@ bool topology_is_primary_thread(unsigned int cpu);
> bool topology_smt_supported(void);
> #else
> #define topology_max_packages() (1)
> -static inline int
> -topology_update_package_map(unsigned int apicid, unsigned int cpu) { return 0; }
> +static inline void
> +topology_update_package_map(unsigned int apicid, unsigned int cpu) { }
> static inline int
> topology_update_die_map(unsigned int dieid, unsigned int cpu) { return 0; }
> static inline int topology_phys_to_logical_pkg(unsigned int pkg) { return 0; }
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> index c296cb1c0113..22d19a1feafd 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> @@ -1673,7 +1673,7 @@ static void validate_apic_and_package_id(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> pr_err(FW_BUG "CPU%u: APIC id mismatch. Firmware: %x APIC: %x\n",
> cpu, apicid, c->initial_apicid);
> }
> - BUG_ON(topology_update_package_map(c->phys_proc_id, cpu));
> + topology_update_package_map(c->phys_proc_id, cpu);
> BUG_ON(topology_update_die_map(c->cpu_die_id, cpu));
> #else
> c->logical_proc_id = 0;
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
> index 5e7f9532a10d..20c67cca245b 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
> @@ -327,7 +327,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(topology_phys_to_logical_die);
> * @pkg: The physical package id as retrieved via CPUID
> * @cpu: The cpu for which this is updated
> */
> -int topology_update_package_map(unsigned int pkg, unsigned int cpu)
> +void topology_update_package_map(unsigned int pkg, unsigned int cpu)
> {
> int new;
>
> @@ -343,7 +343,6 @@ int topology_update_package_map(unsigned int pkg, unsigned int cpu)
> }
> found:
> cpu_data(cpu).logical_proc_id = new;
> - return 0;
> }
> /**
> * topology_update_die_map - Update the physical to logical die map
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-07 18:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-06 12:23 Li kunyu
2022-06-07 17:44 ` Tim Chen [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=35202f2acb9367b926b2066af3f7f4731a9c5f47.camel@linux.intel.com \
--to=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=ionela.voinescu@arm.com \
--cc=kunyu@nfschina.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=ray.huang@amd.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tim.gardner@canonical.com \
--cc=tony.luck@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®