[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52FC79DF.9060204@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 15:53:03 +0800
From: Alex Shi <alex.shi@...aro.org>
To: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>, peterz@...radead.org,
mingo@...nel.org
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 3/3] sched: Move idle_stamp up to the core
On 02/07/2014 07:10 AM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> The idle_balance modifies the idle_stamp field of the rq, making this
> information to be shared across core.c and fair.c. As we can know if the
> cpu is going to idle or not with the previous patch, let's encapsulate the
> idle_stamp information in core.c by moving it up to the caller. The
> idle_balance function returns true in case a balancing occured and the cpu
> won't be idle, false if no balance happened and the cpu is going idle.
>
> Cc: mingo@...nel.org
> Cc: alex.shi@...aro.org
> Cc: peterz@...radead.org
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Reviewed-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@...aro.org>
--
Thanks
Alex
--
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