[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1362676917.10972.23.camel@laptop>
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 18:21:57 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Michael Wang <wangyun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Nikunj A. Dadhania" <nikunj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ram Pai <linuxram@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: wakeup buddy
On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 15:06 +0800, Michael Wang wrote:
> +static inline int wakeup_related(struct task_struct *p)
> +{
> + if (wakeup_buddy(p, current)) {
> + /*
> + * Now check whether current still focus on his buddy.
> + */
> + if (wakeup_buddy(current, p))
> + return 1;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
Not commenting on the thing in general, but:
static inline bool wakeup_related(struct task_struct *p)
{
return wakeup_buddy(p, current) && wakeup_buddy(current, p);
}
is far shorter and easier to read :-)
--
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