[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bcd48c73-b65f-47be-917b-7fb2b8ed8ec0@arm.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2025 14:55:34 +0100
From: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Chris Mason <clm@...a.com>,
Joseph Salisbury <joseph.salisbury@...cle.com>,
Adam Li <adamli@...amperecomputing.com>,
Hazem Mohamed Abuelfotoh <abuehaze@...zon.com>, Josh Don <joshdon@...gle.com>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, juri.lelli@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com, mgorman@...e.de,
vschneid@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] sched/fair: Small cleanup to sched_balance_newidle()
On 07.11.25 17:06, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Pull out the !sd check to simplify code.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
> ---
> kernel/sched/fair.c | 10 ++++++----
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -12811,14 +12811,16 @@ static int sched_balance_newidle(struct
>
> rcu_read_lock();
Maybe scoped_guard(rcu) here?
> sd = rcu_dereference_check_sched_domain(this_rq->sd);
> + if (!sd) {
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> + goto out;
> + }
>
> if (!get_rd_overloaded(this_rq->rd) ||
> - (sd && this_rq->avg_idle < sd->max_newidle_lb_cost)) {
> + this_rq->avg_idle < sd->max_newidle_lb_cost) {
>
> - if (sd)
> - update_next_balance(sd, &next_balance);
> + update_next_balance(sd, &next_balance);
> rcu_read_unlock();
> -
> goto out;
> }
> rcu_read_unlock();
Powered by blists - more mailing lists