From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D199C43334 for ; Thu, 2 Jun 2022 06:44:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230503AbiFBGob (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jun 2022 02:44:31 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:48110 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230162AbiFBGo2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jun 2022 02:44:28 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 538CB230990 for ; Wed, 1 Jun 2022 23:44:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1654152266; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=VoyA/L0tlcMVaTBmlf7Z/ZHtCkE4mBDsIVQpvWHfbKo=; b=J5oC8Gq1h6AWsR7j0rKIRPqzx5wrJDquXVrpQtxZU+MD/4VJ5/0lutBL4hrR8C0fAtvxwB lbei2r9Fo3bEd7LyUxG4bQYW02LSQKnKnlulIkhjsSqL8PIjp2BCqQHHfgmDWwGI1GIjHy A2Lx54UX17I0uoaKXfIcx8rKY1sPu8k= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mx3-rdu2.redhat.com [66.187.233.73]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-235-Gb2az9dsP8-kaBxZr050Yw-1; Thu, 02 Jun 2022 02:44:14 -0400 X-MC-Unique: Gb2az9dsP8-kaBxZr050Yw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 76CE11C006B1; Thu, 2 Jun 2022 06:44:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.72.12.91] (ovpn-12-91.pek2.redhat.com [10.72.12.91]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C8DC87AD8; Thu, 2 Jun 2022 06:44:07 +0000 (UTC) Reply-To: Gavin Shan Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 09/16] arch_topology: Drop LLC identifier stash from the CPU topology To: Sudeep Holla Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Atish Patra , Atish Patra , Vincent Guittot , Morten Rasmussen , Dietmar Eggemann , Qing Wang , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Rob Herring References: <20220525081416.3306043-2-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <20220525081416.3306043-3-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <20220525081416.3306043-4-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <20220525081416.3306043-5-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <20220525081416.3306043-6-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <20220525081416.3306043-7-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <20220525081416.3306043-8-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <20220525081416.3306043-9-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <20220525081416.3306043-10-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <3860bfcc-a323-c031-0fdd-77001d338bec@redhat.com> <20220601120658.2x737nhyxmodoo7t@bogus> From: Gavin Shan Message-ID: Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2022 14:44:04 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20220601120658.2x737nhyxmodoo7t@bogus> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.11.54.5 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Sudeep, On 6/1/22 8:06 PM, Sudeep Holla wrote: > On Wed, Jun 01, 2022 at 11:35:20AM +0800, Gavin Shan wrote: >> On 5/25/22 4:14 PM, Sudeep Holla wrote: >>> Since the cacheinfo LLC information is used directly in arch_topology, >>> there is no need to parse and store the LLC ID information only for >>> ACPI systems in the CPU topology. >>> >>> Remove the redundant LLC ID from the generic CPU arch_topology information. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla >>> --- >>> drivers/base/arch_topology.c | 1 - >>> include/linux/arch_topology.h | 1 - >>> 2 files changed, 2 deletions(-) >>> >> >> How about merge the changes to PATCH[08/16]? I don't see why we need put >> the changes into separate patches. >> > > It took a while to remember as I was with the same opinion as yours but > decided to split them for one reason: to keep arch specific change in a > separate patch(if that becomes a need due to some conflict or some other > non-technical reason) > Ok. Thanks for the explanation, which sounds reasonable to me. Thanks, Gavin