[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=3f8nvEuFbHqjnTXtrK_sAC-A9+XAMjAHgjT3d@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 14:11:20 +0800
From: Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@...il.com>
To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mfwitten@...il.com,
christian@...dbynature.de, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] sched: fix autogroup nice tune on UP
On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 1:54 PM, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 7:40 AM, Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@...il.com> wrote:
>> +static void update_cfs_shares(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, long weight_delta)
>> +{
>> + struct task_group *tg;
>> + struct sched_entity *se;
>> +
>> + if (!cfs_rq)
>> + return;
>> +
>> + tg = cfs_rq->tg;
>> + se = tg->se[0];
>> + if (!se)
>> + return;
>> + if (likely(se->load.weight == tg->shares))
>> + return;
>> + reweight_entity(cfs_rq_of(se), se, tg->shares);
>> +}
>
> Wouldn't it be cleaner if we'd separate the shares calculation in a
> separate helper function that's just
>
> return tg->shares;
I'm not sure I get your point correctly.
You mean the two tg->shares above, right?
If so, yeah, we can declare a variable for that.
>
> for UP and extract the current logic for the SMP version?
>
This is the UP specific version, I don't touch SMP version.
On SMP, update_cfs_shares() is more complex.
Thanks,
Yong
--
Only stand for myself
--
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