[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230526151335.oPeFiIdq@linutronix.de>
Date: Fri, 26 May 2023 17:13:35 +0200
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Consider task_struct::saved_state in
wait_task_inactive().
On 2023-05-26 10:05:43 [+0200], Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> New day, new chances... How's this? Code-gen doesn't look totally
> insane, but then, making sense of an optimizing compiler's output is
> always a wee challenge.
Noticed it too late but looks good. Tested, works.
Sebastian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists