[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200511112340.GB1864@quack2.suse.cz>
Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 13:23:40 +0200
From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To: Tan Hu <tan.hu@....com.cn>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
jack@...e.cz, xue.zhihong@....com.cn, wang.yi59@....com.cn,
wang.liang82@....com.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] lib/flex_proportions.c: cleanup __fprop_inc_percpu_max
On Sat 09-05-20 14:12:33, Tan Hu wrote:
> If the given type has fraction smaller than max_frac/FPROP_FRAC_BASE,
> the code could be modified to call __fprop_inc_percpu() directly and
> easier to understand. After this patch, fprop_reflect_period_percpu()
> will be called twice, and quicky return on pl->period == p->period
> test, so it would not result to significant downside of performance.
>
> Thanks for Jan's guidance.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tan Hu <tan.hu@....com.cn>
Thanks for the patch. It looks good to me. You can add:
Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Honza
> ---
> lib/flex_proportions.c | 7 +++----
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/flex_proportions.c b/lib/flex_proportions.c
> index 7852bfff5..451543937 100644
> --- a/lib/flex_proportions.c
> +++ b/lib/flex_proportions.c
> @@ -266,8 +266,7 @@ void __fprop_inc_percpu_max(struct fprop_global *p,
> if (numerator >
> (((u64)denominator) * max_frac) >> FPROP_FRAC_SHIFT)
> return;
> - } else
> - fprop_reflect_period_percpu(p, pl);
> - percpu_counter_add_batch(&pl->events, 1, PROP_BATCH);
> - percpu_counter_add(&p->events, 1);
> + }
> +
> + __fprop_inc_percpu(p, pl);
> }
> --
> 2.19.1
>
--
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>
SUSE Labs, CR
Powered by blists - more mailing lists