[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <17ac3b59-b189-41d9-b88d-268d7202dde2@web.de>
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2024 15:22:59 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Yang Yingliang <yangyingliang@...wei.com>, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@...el.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>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>, Wei Li <liwei391@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] sched/core: Introduce sched_set_rq_on/offline()
helper
> Introduce sched_set_rq_on/offline() helper, so it can be called
> in normal or error path simply. No functional changed.
Would you like to improve such a change description another bit?
…
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -9604,6 +9604,30 @@ void set_rq_offline(struct rq *rq)
…
> +static inline void sched_set_rq_online(struct rq *rq, int cpu)
> +{
…
> + rq_lock_irqsave(rq, &rf);
> + if (rq->rd) {
…
> + }
> + rq_unlock_irqrestore(rq, &rf);
> +}
…
Under which circumstances would you become interested to apply a statement
like “guard(rq_lock_irqsave)(rq);”?
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.10/source/kernel/sched/sched.h#L1741
Regards,
Markusbsegall@...gle.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists