[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140127130850.GB4941@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 14:08:50 +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 08:59:40PM -0500, Dongsheng Yang wrote:
> >>>>+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.
> >>>
> >>Oops, sorry for the noise. I am a newbie here, could you help to point out
> >>that
> >> which tree is the latest version for sched. Thanx :)
> >tip/sched/core or tip/master, but that's not the issue. There's no point
> >in having an inline and a macro that do the exact same thing.
>
> Okey, so, do you mean I should remove the macro of TASK_NICE and
> implement it directly in inline task_nice? If so, I will send v2 soon.
Yah, although ideally someone would rethink the entire prio thing and
get rid of the back and forth.
--
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