* Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.ku...@linux.ibm.com> [2023-11-15 12:05:22]:
> Srikar Dronamraju <sri...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
>
> >
> > arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> > 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c
> > index ab691c89d787..69a3262024f1 100644
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c
> > @@ -993,16 +993,20 @@ static bool shared_caches;
> > /* cpumask of CPUs with asymmetric SMT dependency */
> > static int powerpc_smt_flags(void)
> > {
> > - int flags = SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY | SD_SHARE_PKG_RESOURCES;
> > + if (!cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_ASYM_SMT))
> > + return SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY | SD_SHARE_PKG_RESOURCES;
> >
> > - if (cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_ASYM_SMT)) {
> > - printk_once(KERN_INFO "Enabling Asymmetric SMT scheduling\n");
> > - flags |= SD_ASYM_PACKING;
> > - }
> > - return flags;
> > + return SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY | SD_SHARE_PKG_RESOURCES | SD_ASYM_PACKING;
> > }
> > #endif
> >
>
> Only relevant change there is dropping printk_once(). Rest of the
> changes are not needed?
>
> -aneesh
If you are looking at just this hunk, then yes its moving the printk_once to
another function.
--
Thanks and Regards
Srikar Dronamraju
