linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] sched / idle: Reduce the number of branches in the idle loop

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20150504142505.GM23123@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Mon, 4 May 2015 16:25:05 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc:	Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] sched / idle: Reduce the number of branches in the
 idle loop

On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 03:54:43PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> The "reflect" variable that had to be added to cpuidle_idle_call() to fix a
> regression during the 4.0 cycle has bothered me a bit since then and guess
> what?  It is not necessary.
> 
> After the last regression fix related to tick_broadcast_exit() I realized
> that it should be possible to eliminate this variable by splitting
> cpuidle_idle_call() into smaller routines and reordering the code in
> question which is done by this patch series.
> 
> It also gets rid of one more redundant check while at it.


Ooh nice! Yes that thing bothered me too.

Once you fix that one weird opening bracket:

Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
--
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/