All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: "Nikunj A. Dadhania" <nikunj@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	mingo@elte.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: remove redundant check in select_task_rq_fair
Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 12:20:43 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1307442043.3625.6.camel@marge.simson.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1307441361.2322.239.camel@twins>

On Tue, 2011-06-07 at 12:09 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-06-07 at 15:34 +0530, Nikunj A. Dadhania wrote:
> > On Tue, 07 Jun 2011 11:53:34 +0200, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2011-06-07 at 15:18 +0530, Nikunj A. Dadhania wrote:
> > > > When balancing for wakeup affinity, a redundant check can removed.
> > > 
> > > Yes, tempting, but no, now you've got an extra call to wake_affine(),
> > > which is more expensive.
> 
> > Ah, got that. How about this, it is more readable. Other options would
> > be to add a comment.
> 
> > -		if (cpu == prev_cpu || wake_affine(affine_sd, p, sync))
> > +		if (cpu != prev_cpu && wake_affine(affine_sd, p, sync))
> >  			prev_cpu = cpu;
> 
> I guess that depends on which way your head is wired and how strong your
> boolean algebra is.. Suresh, Mike any preference? I don't much care
> either way.

Me either.

	-Mike



      reply	other threads:[~2011-06-07 10:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-06-07  9:48 [PATCH] sched: remove redundant check in select_task_rq_fair Nikunj A. Dadhania
2011-06-07  9:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-06-07 10:04   ` Nikunj A. Dadhania
2011-06-07 10:09     ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-06-07 10:20       ` Mike Galbraith [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1307442043.3625.6.camel@marge.simson.net \
    --to=efault@gmx.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=nikunj@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.