From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] cpuidle: menu: Get rid of first_idx from menu_select()
Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2018 10:35:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b365081f-00bb-ec2a-84b2-48bed1b76c19@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0h1Z7MKjq9XY0-tn9U4J3CdycYPbGkM3fjH7-FzaJ=uJA@mail.gmail.com>
On 04/10/2018 19:19, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 4:51 PM Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 11:44:06PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>>>
>>> Rearrange the code in menu_select() so that the loop over idle states
>>> always starts from 0 and get rid of the first_idx variable.
>>>
>>> While at it, add two empty lines to separate conditional statements
>>> one another.
>>>
>>> No intentional behavior changes.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>
>> This code is becoming a bit complex to follow :/
>>
>> May be I missed something, but it is not possible to enter the condition without
>> idx != 0, no ? (I meant the condition if ((drv->states[idx].flags &
>> FLAG_POLLING))
>
> Not sure what you mean.
Yes, sorry let me clarify.
I meant the flag polling is always on state[0], so if the flag is set
then idx == 0.
We have the conditions:
drv->states[idx].flags & CPUIDLE_FLAG_POLLING
If it is true then idx is zero.
Then comes the second condition:
i == idx + 1
because of the above, idx is zero, then it can become i == 1.
Then the variable assignation:
idx = i can be replaced by idx = 1
> We start with idx = -1, i = 0. If state[0] is enabled, idx becomes 0.
>
> If the target residency or exit latency of state[0] are already beyond
> the limits, we just bail out and state[0] will be returned.
>
> If not, we go to i = 1, but idx is still 0. If the target residency
> of state[1] is beyond predicted_us (which is the interesting case), we
> check (drv->states[0].flags & FLAG_POLLING) and so on.
>
> Currently, the polling state must be state[0] (if used at all) anyway.
>
>> Reviewed-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
>>
>
> Thanks!
>
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-05 8:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-02 21:41 [PATCH 0/6] cpuidle: menu: Fixes, optimizations and cleanups Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-02 21:42 ` [PATCH 1/6] cpuidle: menu: Fix wakeup statistics updates for polling state Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-04 8:19 ` Daniel Lezcano
2018-10-02 21:42 ` [PATCH 2/6] cpuidle: menu: Compute first_idx when latency_req is known Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-04 14:22 ` Daniel Lezcano
2018-10-02 21:44 ` [PATCH 3/6] cpuidle: menu: Get rid of first_idx from menu_select() Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-04 7:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-10-04 7:53 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-04 8:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-10-04 14:51 ` Daniel Lezcano
2018-10-04 17:19 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-05 8:35 ` Daniel Lezcano [this message]
2018-10-05 8:49 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-02 21:45 ` [PATCH 4/6] cpuidle: menu: Do not update last_state_idx in menu_select() Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-04 14:57 ` Daniel Lezcano
2018-10-02 21:46 ` [PATCH 5/6] cpuidle: menu: Avoid computations for very close timers Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-04 15:50 ` Daniel Lezcano
2018-10-04 17:11 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-02 21:47 ` [PATCH 6/6] cpuidle: menu: Move the latency_req == 0 special case check Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-04 6:55 ` [PATCH 0/6] cpuidle: menu: Fixes, optimizations and cleanups Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-04 7:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=b365081f-00bb-ec2a-84b2-48bed1b76c19@linaro.org \
--to=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
/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
Powered by JetHome