[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210609112544.GB104634@lothringen>
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2021 13:25:44 +0200
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched: Add default dynamic preempt mode Kconfig
On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 03:55:59PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 02:04:41PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > index 9e9a5be35cde..df47a8275c37 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > @@ -6238,6 +6238,14 @@ enum {
> >
> > int preempt_dynamic_mode = preempt_dynamic_full;
> >
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_PREEMPT_DYNAMIC_FULL)
> > +static __initdata int preempt_dynamic_mode_init = preempt_dynamic_full;
> > +#elif defined(CONFIG_PREEMPT_DYNAMIC_VOLUNTARY)
> > +static __initdata int preempt_dynamic_mode_init = preempt_dynamic_voluntary;
> > +#elif defined(CONFIG_PREEMPT_DYNAMIC_NONE)
> > +static __initdata int preempt_dynamic_mode_init = preempt_dynamic_none;
> > +#endif
>
> Why does preempt_dynamic_mode_init exist? Why can't we simply set
> preempt_dynamic_mode?
To avoid the unconditional calls to static_call_update() on boot but I can do
it in a more simple way.
Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists