From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rodrigo Siqueira Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2017 23:50:19 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Scheduler: Removed first parameter from prepare_lock_switch Message-Id: <20171206235019.vvpx467magnuk25d@smtp.gmail.com> List-Id: References: <20171205140200.4guikhmagltvoehm@smtp.gmail.com> <20171206121437.g7wsnqhx6oyycyqf@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> In-Reply-To: <20171206121437.g7wsnqhx6oyycyqf@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Yes, this is correct. However it had me looking at that code and pretty > much everything else is completely wrong :-) > > That is, its functionally correct (probably), but the function name is > not descriptive of what the function does and the comment is just plain > wrong. > > Also, since both functions are only used in core.c we should probably > move them there. I'm not sure I understood it completely. What do you mean for wrong? Will CONFIG_SMP a meaningless check here? How about moving 'prepare_lock_switch' code from sched.h to prepare_task_switch in core.c? And about the comment in 'prepare_lock_switch', I can replace it to "Set on_cpu to 1 during the context switch will lock the processes on the cpu" > Do you think you can fix all that as well? Yeah absolutely, I just might need a few more comprehension on it.