[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1226343016.7685.444.camel@twins>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 19:50:16 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Suresh B Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Vatsa <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
David Collier-Brown <davecb@....com>,
Tim Connors <tconnors@...ro.swin.edu.au>,
Max Krasnyansky <maxk@...lcomm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 0/5] Tunable sched_mc_power_savings=n
a quick response, I'll read them more carefully tomorrow:
- why are the preferred cpu things pointers? afaict using just the cpu
number is both smaller and clearer to the reader.
- in patch 5/5 you do:
+ spin_unlock(&this_rq->lock);
+ double_rq_lock(this_rq, busiest);
we call that double_lock_balance()
- comments go like:
/*
* this is a multi-
* line comment
*/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists