On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 02:05:41PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote: > * Gautham R Shenoy <e...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> [2020-12-08 22:55:40]: > > > > > > > NIT: > > > tglx mentions in one of his recent comments to try keep a reverse fir tree > > > ordering of variables where possible. > > > > I suppose you mean moving the longer local variable declarations to to > > the top and shorter ones to the bottom. Thanks. Will fix this. > > > > Yes. > > > > > + } > > > > + > > > > + if (!tg) > > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > > + > > > > + cpu_group_start = get_cpu_thread_group_start(cpu, tg); > > > > > > This whole hunk should be moved to a new function and called before > > > init_cpu_cache_map. It will simplify the logic to great extent. > > > > I suppose you are referring to the part where we select the correct > > tg. Yeah, that can move to a different helper. > > > > Yes, I would prefer if we could call this new helper outside > init_cpu_cache_map. > > > > > > > > > - zalloc_cpumask_var_node(&per_cpu(cpu_l1_cache_map, cpu), > > > > - GFP_KERNEL, cpu_to_node(cpu)); > > > > + mask = &per_cpu(cpu_l1_cache_map, cpu); > > > > + > > > > + zalloc_cpumask_var_node(mask, GFP_KERNEL, cpu_to_node(cpu)); > > > > > > > > > > This hunk (and the next hunk) should be moved to next patch. > > > > > > > The next patch is only about introducing THREAD_GROUP_SHARE_L2. Hence > > I put in any other code in this patch, since it seems to be a logical > > place to collate whatever we have in a generic form. > > > > While I am fine with it, having a pointer that always points to the same > mask looks wierd.
Sure. Moving some of this to a separate preparatory patch. > > -- > Thanks and Regards > Srikar Dronamraju
