[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250702121159.172688305@infradead.org>
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2025 13:49:32 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: mingo@...hat.com,
juri.lelli@...hat.com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
dietmar.eggemann@....com,
rostedt@...dmis.org,
bsegall@...gle.com,
mgorman@...e.de,
vschneid@...hat.com,
clm@...a.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
peterz@...radead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 08/12] sched: Re-arrange __ttwu_queue_wakelist()
The relation between ttwu_queue_wakelist() and __ttwu_queue_wakelist()
is ill defined -- probably because the former is the only caller of
the latter and it grew into an arbitrary subfunction.
Clean things up a little such that __ttwu_queue_wakelist() no longer
takes the wake_flags argument, making for a more sensible separation.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
---
kernel/sched/core.c | 9 +++++----
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -3848,11 +3848,11 @@ bool call_function_single_prep_ipi(int c
* via sched_ttwu_wakeup() for activation so the wakee incurs the cost
* of the wakeup instead of the waker.
*/
-static void __ttwu_queue_wakelist(struct task_struct *p, int cpu, int wake_flags)
+static void __ttwu_queue_wakelist(struct task_struct *p, int cpu)
{
struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
- p->sched_remote_wakeup = !!(wake_flags & WF_MIGRATED);
+ sched_clock_cpu(cpu); /* Sync clocks across CPUs */
WRITE_ONCE(rq->ttwu_pending, 1);
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
@@ -3954,8 +3954,9 @@ static bool ttwu_queue_wakelist(struct t
if (!ttwu_queue_cond(p, cpu, def))
return false;
- sched_clock_cpu(cpu); /* Sync clocks across CPUs */
- __ttwu_queue_wakelist(p, cpu, wake_flags);
+ p->sched_remote_wakeup = !!(wake_flags & WF_MIGRATED);
+
+ __ttwu_queue_wakelist(p, cpu);
return true;
}
Powered by blists - more mailing lists