Commit 94f438c8 authored by Peter Zijlstra's avatar Peter Zijlstra Committed by Ingo Molnar

sched/core: Clarify SD_flags comment

The SD_flags comment is very terse and doesn't explain why PACKING is
odd.

IIRC the distinction is that the 'normal' ones only describe topology,
while the ASYM_PACKING one also prescribes behaviour. It is odd in the
way that it doesn't only describe things.
Signed-off-by: default avatarPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com
Cc: freedom.tan@mediatek.com
Cc: keita.kobayashi.ym@renesas.com
Cc: mgalbraith@suse.de
Cc: sgurrappadi@nvidia.com
Cc: vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Cc: yuyang.du@intel.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160815105459.GS6879@twins.programming.kicks-ass.netSigned-off-by: default avatarIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
parent 5a962157
......@@ -6355,13 +6355,19 @@ static int sched_domains_curr_level;
/*
* SD_flags allowed in topology descriptions.
*
* SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY - describes SMT topologies
* SD_SHARE_PKG_RESOURCES - describes shared caches
* SD_NUMA - describes NUMA topologies
* SD_SHARE_POWERDOMAIN - describes shared power domain
* These flags are purely descriptive of the topology and do not prescribe
* behaviour. Behaviour is artificial and mapped in the below sd_init()
* function:
*
* Odd one out:
* SD_ASYM_PACKING - describes SMT quirks
* SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY - describes SMT topologies
* SD_SHARE_PKG_RESOURCES - describes shared caches
* SD_NUMA - describes NUMA topologies
* SD_SHARE_POWERDOMAIN - describes shared power domain
*
* Odd one out, which beside describing the topology has a quirk also
* prescribes the desired behaviour that goes along with it:
*
* SD_ASYM_PACKING - describes SMT quirks
*/
#define TOPOLOGY_SD_FLAGS \
(SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY | \
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment