[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140127103258.GZ11314@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 11:32:58 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Dongsheng Yang <yangds.fnst@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, raistlin@...ux.it,
juri.lelli@...il.com, clark.williams@...il.com, mingo@...hat.com,
rostedt@...dmis.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] sched: Implement task_nice and task_prio as static
inline functions.
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 05:15:39PM -0500, Dongsheng Yang wrote:
> +/**
> + * task_prio - return the priority value of a given task.
> + * @p: the task in question.
> + *
> + * Return: The priority value as seen by users in /proc.
> + * RT tasks are offset by -200. Normal tasks are centered
> + * around 0, value goes from -16 to +15.
> + */
> +static inline int task_prio(const struct task_struct *p)
> +{
> + return p->prio - MAX_RT_PRIO;
> +}
Who would ever want to use/rely on this? It doesn't make any sense. And
therefore it shouldn't ever be considered time critical.
> +/**
> + * task_nice - return the nice value of a given task.
> + * @p: the task in question.
> + *
> + * Return: The nice value [ -20 ... 0 ... 19 ].
> + */
> +static inline int task_nice(const struct task_struct *p)
> +{
> + return TASK_NICE(p);
> +}
Urgh, no. Just remove the macro already. Although arguably we should
remove ->static_prio and clean up that entire mess.
--
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