| Message ID | 20220123183925.1052919-18-yury.norov@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | None | expand |
On 23/01/2022 18:38, Yury Norov wrote: > i915_pmu_cpu_online() calls cpumask_weight() to check if any bit of a > given cpumask is set. We can do it more efficiently with cpumask_empty() > because cpumask_empty() stops traversing the cpumask as soon as it finds > first set bit, while cpumask_weight() counts all bits unconditionally. > > Signed-off-by: Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c > index ea655161793e..1894c876b31d 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c > @@ -1048,7 +1048,7 @@ static int i915_pmu_cpu_online(unsigned int cpu, struct hlist_node *node) > GEM_BUG_ON(!pmu->base.event_init); > > /* Select the first online CPU as a designated reader. */ > - if (!cpumask_weight(&i915_pmu_cpumask)) > + if (cpumask_empty(&i915_pmu_cpumask)) > cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, &i915_pmu_cpumask); > > return 0; > Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com> I see it's a large series which only partially appeared on our mailing lists. So for instance it hasn't got tested by our automated CI. (Not that I expect any problems in this patch.) What are the plans in terms of which tree will it get merged through? Regards, Tvrtko
On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 1:28 AM Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > On 23/01/2022 18:38, Yury Norov wrote: > > i915_pmu_cpu_online() calls cpumask_weight() to check if any bit of a > > given cpumask is set. We can do it more efficiently with cpumask_empty() > > because cpumask_empty() stops traversing the cpumask as soon as it finds > > first set bit, while cpumask_weight() counts all bits unconditionally. > > > > Signed-off-by: Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c > > index ea655161793e..1894c876b31d 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c > > @@ -1048,7 +1048,7 @@ static int i915_pmu_cpu_online(unsigned int cpu, struct hlist_node *node) > > GEM_BUG_ON(!pmu->base.event_init); > > > > /* Select the first online CPU as a designated reader. */ > > - if (!cpumask_weight(&i915_pmu_cpumask)) > > + if (cpumask_empty(&i915_pmu_cpumask)) > > cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, &i915_pmu_cpumask); > > > > return 0; > > > > Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com> > > I see it's a large series which only partially appeared on our mailing > lists. The series is here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2022/1/23/223 The branch: https://github.com/norov/linux/tree/bitmap-20220123 > So for instance it hasn't got tested by our automated CI. (Not > that I expect any problems in this patch.) Would be great if you give a test for the whole series, thanks! > What are the plans in terms of which tree will it get merged through? For the patches that will not be merged by maintainers of corresponding subsystems, I'll use my bitmap branch and send it to linux-next. Thanks, Yury
On 25/01/2022 18:16, Yury Norov wrote: > On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 1:28 AM Tvrtko Ursulin > <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com> wrote: >> >> >> On 23/01/2022 18:38, Yury Norov wrote: >>> i915_pmu_cpu_online() calls cpumask_weight() to check if any bit of a >>> given cpumask is set. We can do it more efficiently with cpumask_empty() >>> because cpumask_empty() stops traversing the cpumask as soon as it finds >>> first set bit, while cpumask_weight() counts all bits unconditionally. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c >>> index ea655161793e..1894c876b31d 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c >>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c >>> @@ -1048,7 +1048,7 @@ static int i915_pmu_cpu_online(unsigned int cpu, struct hlist_node *node) >>> GEM_BUG_ON(!pmu->base.event_init); >>> >>> /* Select the first online CPU as a designated reader. */ >>> - if (!cpumask_weight(&i915_pmu_cpumask)) >>> + if (cpumask_empty(&i915_pmu_cpumask)) >>> cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, &i915_pmu_cpumask); >>> >>> return 0; >>> >> >> Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com> >> >> I see it's a large series which only partially appeared on our mailing >> lists. > > The series is here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2022/1/23/223 > The branch: https://github.com/norov/linux/tree/bitmap-20220123 > >> So for instance it hasn't got tested by our automated CI. (Not >> that I expect any problems in this patch.) > > Would be great if you give a test for the whole series, thanks! Can't really test the whole series for you, but if you want to send just the i915 patch standalone to the intel-gfx mailing list, that would trigger the CI run and if that passes we can merge that single one. >> What are the plans in terms of which tree will it get merged through? > > For the patches that will not be merged by maintainers of corresponding > subsystems, I'll use my bitmap branch and send it to linux-next. Or I guess we can wait for them to trickle back to us this way. Regards, Tvrtko
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c index ea655161793e..1894c876b31d 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c @@ -1048,7 +1048,7 @@ static int i915_pmu_cpu_online(unsigned int cpu, struct hlist_node *node) GEM_BUG_ON(!pmu->base.event_init); /* Select the first online CPU as a designated reader. */ - if (!cpumask_weight(&i915_pmu_cpumask)) + if (cpumask_empty(&i915_pmu_cpumask)) cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, &i915_pmu_cpumask); return 0;
i915_pmu_cpu_online() calls cpumask_weight() to check if any bit of a given cpumask is set. We can do it more efficiently with cpumask_empty() because cpumask_empty() stops traversing the cpumask as soon as it finds first set bit, while cpumask_weight() counts all bits unconditionally. Signed-off-by: Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)