[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190313201821.GW2482@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 21:18:21 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Todd Kjos <tkjos@...gle.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>,
Steve Muckle <smuckle@...gle.com>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 03/15] sched/core: uclamp: Add system default clamps
On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 10:05:42AM +0000, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> +static void uclamp_fork(struct task_struct *p)
> +{
> + unsigned int clamp_id;
> +
> + if (unlikely(!p->sched_class->uclamp_enabled))
> + return;
> +
> + for (clamp_id = 0; clamp_id < UCLAMP_CNT; ++clamp_id)
> + p->uclamp[clamp_id].active = false;
> +}
Because in that case .active == false, and copy_process() will have done
thr right thing?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists