13 Oct
2015
13 Oct
'15
3:23 a.m.
On 12-10-15, 12:12, Saravana Kannan wrote:
if (new_policy) { /* related_cpus should at least include policy->cpus. */
cpumask_or(policy->related_cpus, policy->related_cpus, policy->cpus);
cpumask_copy(policy->related_cpus, policy->cpus);Again, why? It actually seems wrong. A 4 core cluster could come up with just 2 cores when the policy is added. But the related CPUs would be 4 CPUs.
Firstly, the patch hasn't changed anything at all. related_cpus was empty until this point, and orring or setting it with ->cpus will result in the same output.
Secondly, this is what we always wanted. related_cpus should contain the mask of all possible CPUs for that cluster.
--
viresh