[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <76e24d20-b966-4efb-a83c-583618a7d3c7@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2024 16:41:46 +0800
From: kuiliang Shi <seakeel@...il.com>
To: Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com>, alexs@...nel.org
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
sshegde@...ux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] sched/fair: cleanup sched_use_asym_prio
On 2/1/24 9:13 AM, Ricardo Neri wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 09:17:05PM +0800, alexs@...nel.org wrote:
>> From: Alex Shi <alexs@...nel.org>
>>
>> And simplify the one line code. No function change.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alexs@...nel.org>
>> To: Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com>
>> To: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>
>> To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
>> To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
>> To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
>> ---
>> kernel/sched/fair.c | 6 ++----
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> index 8d70417f5125..ebd659af2d78 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> @@ -9741,10 +9741,8 @@ group_type group_classify(unsigned int imbalance_pct,
>> */
>> static bool sched_use_asym_prio(struct sched_domain *sd, int cpu)
>> {
>> - if (!sched_smt_active())
>> - return true;
>> -
>> - return sd->flags & SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY || is_core_idle(cpu);
>> + return (!sched_smt_active()) ||
>> + (sd->flags & SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY) || is_core_idle(cpu);
>
> I think that compressing the two conditions into one hurts readability.
Sure, will remove this change.
Thanks
Alex
> As implemented, it is clear that no further checks are required if there
> is no SMT.
>
> Also, please see my comment in patch 6/6.
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists