[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170621164846.GD3721@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 09:48:46 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc: peterz@...radead.org, oleg@...hat.com, josh@...htriplett.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
jiangshanlai@...il.com, paul.gortmaker@...driver.com,
boqun.feng@...il.com, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
dmitry.torokhov@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] swait: add idle to make idle-hacks on kthreads
explicit
On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 02:45:45PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> In this proper patch form I've made the non-timeout idle swait void.
> I've also integrated Paul's comment / ident changes, and added documentation
> as suggested by Boqun.
>
> Let me know if there are issue, otherwise, Paul feel free to take!
Nice docbook comments! I replaced my modified commits with your new ones,
queued for further review and testing.
Just out of curiosity, why the three-line swait_event_idle() with the
"break" statement instead of the two-line version with the inverted
condition? (I am fine either way, just curious.)
Thanx, Paul
> Luis R. Rodriguez (2):
> swait: add idle variants which don't contribute to load average
> rcu: use idle versions of swait to make idle-hack clear
>
> include/linux/swait.h | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> kernel/rcu/tree.c | 11 +++++------
> 2 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.11.0
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists