Re: [PATCH] cpuidle: dt: fix opencoded for_each_cpu() in idle_state_valid()
From: Rafael J. Wysocki
Date: Wed Jul 02 2025 - 14:27:53 EST
On Wed, Jun 4, 2025 at 11:39 PM Yury Norov <yury.norov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> From: Yury Norov [NVIDIA] <yury.norov@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> The function opencodes the for_each_cpu_from() by using an open for-loop.
> Fix that in sake of readability.
>
> While there, drop the 'valid' variable as it's pretty useless here.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yury Norov [NVIDIA] <yury.norov@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/cpuidle/dt_idle_states.c | 14 +++++---------
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/dt_idle_states.c b/drivers/cpuidle/dt_idle_states.c
> index 97feb7d8fb23..558d49838990 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/dt_idle_states.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/dt_idle_states.c
> @@ -98,7 +98,6 @@ static bool idle_state_valid(struct device_node *state_node, unsigned int idx,
> {
> int cpu;
> struct device_node *cpu_node, *curr_state_node;
> - bool valid = true;
>
> /*
> * Compare idle state phandles for index idx on all CPUs in the
> @@ -107,20 +106,17 @@ static bool idle_state_valid(struct device_node *state_node, unsigned int idx,
> * retrieved from. If a mismatch is found bail out straight
> * away since we certainly hit a firmware misconfiguration.
> */
> - for (cpu = cpumask_next(cpumask_first(cpumask), cpumask);
> - cpu < nr_cpu_ids; cpu = cpumask_next(cpu, cpumask)) {
> + cpu = cpumask_first(cpumask) + 1;
Doing
cpu = cpumask_next(cpumask_first(cpumask), cpumask);
here might save a few iterations for sparse cpumasks.
> + for_each_cpu_from(cpu, cpumask) {
> cpu_node = of_cpu_device_node_get(cpu);
> curr_state_node = of_get_cpu_state_node(cpu_node, idx);
> - if (state_node != curr_state_node)
> - valid = false;
> -
> of_node_put(curr_state_node);
> of_node_put(cpu_node);
> - if (!valid)
> - break;
> + if (state_node != curr_state_node)
> + return false;
> }
>
> - return valid;
> + return true;
> }
>
> /**
> --
> 2.43.0
>