From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
"open list:SCHEDULER" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/clock: Remove pointless test in cpu_clock/local_clock
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2016 19:59:40 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56FEB70C.6030703@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160401151017.GK3448@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 04/01/2016 05:10 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 03:46:48PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>
>> Remove the duplicate test by directly calling sched_clock_cpu() and let the
>> static key act in this function instead. We can assume gcc is smart enough to
>> inline cpu_clock()/local_clock() to sched_clock_cpu().
>
> Why assume if you can easily check; so does it indeed inline?
Actually, no. They are not inlined.
With this patch we end up with one line functions:
#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_UNSTABLE_SCHED_CLOCK
u64 cpu_clock(int cpu)
{
return sched_clock_cpu(cpu);
}
u64 local_clock(void)
{
return sched_clock_cpu(raw_smp_processor_id());
}
#else
u64 cpu_clock(int cpu)
{
return sched_clock();
}
u64 local_clock(void)
{
return sched_clock();
}
#endif
is it worth to convert them to static inline function ?
(static inline does effectively inline those functions).
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-01 17:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-01 13:46 [PATCH] sched/clock: Remove pointless test in cpu_clock/local_clock Daniel Lezcano
2016-04-01 15:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-01 17:59 ` Daniel Lezcano [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=56FEB70C.6030703@linaro.org \
--to=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
/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.