Re: [PATCH 03/30] thread_info: tif_need_resched() now takes resched_t as param

[Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>]

On Wed, Feb 14 2024 at 14:08, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 09:55:27PM -0800, Ankur Arora wrote:
>>  
>> -static __always_inline bool tif_need_resched(void)
>> +static __always_inline bool __tif_need_resched(int nr_flag)
>>  {
>> -	return test_bit(TIF_NEED_RESCHED,
>> -			(unsigned long *)(&current_thread_info()->flags));
>> +	return test_bit(nr_flag,
>> +		(unsigned long *)(&current_thread_info()->flags));
>>  }
>>  
>>  #endif /* _ASM_GENERIC_BITOPS_INSTRUMENTED_NON_ATOMIC_H */
>>  
>> +static __always_inline bool tif_need_resched(resched_t rs)
>> +{
>> +	/*
>> +	 * With !PREEMPT_AUTO tif_need_resched(NR_lazy) is defined
>> +	 * as TIF_NEED_RESCHED (the TIF_NEED_RESCHED_LAZY flag is not
>> +	 * defined). Return false in that case.
>> +	 */
>> +	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_AUTO) || rs == NR_now)
>> +		return __tif_need_resched(tif_resched(rs));
>> +	else
>> +		return false;
>> +}
>
> As above, I think this would be a bit simpler/clearer if we did:
>
> static __always_inline bool tif_need_resched_now(void)
> {
> 	return __tif_need_resched(TIF_NEED_RESCHED);
> }
>
> static __always_inline bool tif_need_resched_lazy(void)
> {
> 	return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_AUTO) &&
> 	        __tif_need_resched(TIF_NEED_RESCHED_LAZY);
> }

Yes please.