[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y+oMND+7L7S9mByY@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2023 11:08:52 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: JaeJoon Jung <rgbi3307@...il.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [kernel/sched/core.c] Review and Modified of the prio_less()
about sched class priority.
On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 10:11:04AM +0900, JaeJoon Jung wrote:
> The sched_class structure is defined to be sorted by pointer size.
> @@ -176,22 +161,18 @@ static inline int __task_prio(struct task_struct *p)
> /* real prio, less is less */
> static inline bool prio_less(struct task_struct *a, struct
> task_struct *b, bool in_fi)
> {
> + int less = a->sched_class - b->sched_class;
>
> + if (less == 0) {
> + if (a->sched_class == &dl_sched_class)
> + return !dl_time_before(a->dl.deadline, b->dl.deadline);
>
> + else if (a->sched_class == &fair_sched_class)
> + return cfs_prio_less(a, b, in_fi);
> + else
> + return false;
> + } else
> + return (less > 0) ? true : false;
> }
>
> If the prio_less() function is modified as above, the __task_prio()
> function is not required.
Yeah, except your patch is whitespace mangled..
Powered by blists - more mailing lists