From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/15] Refactor cpu_has_work/any_cpu_has_work in cpus.c
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 11:54:16 -0200
Message-ID: <20110209135416.GA32689@amt.cnet>
References: <cover.1297077506.git.jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
 <1e7a4f5097aafb5da844c1b9ff8661539d0d10e8.1297077506.git.jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
 <20110208185056.GA13617@amt.cnet>
 <4D524B56.1050900@web.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:33182 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1755635Ab1BIOoz (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 9 Feb 2011 09:44:55 -0500
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4D524B56.1050900@web.de>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 09:07:50AM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > Do you really find it easier to read evaluations grouped with || ? I
> > don't.
> 
> I do, specifically as the old version was even more confusing in that
> important detail "return 0" vs. "return 1". But even the new benefits
> from the grouping IMHO.

Well alright.

> > Sorry but the name change does not feel right either: CPU is still idle
> > if the vm is not running.
> 
> But that's exactly what the function returns. Or is it confusing if we
> are talking about the vcpu or the whole thread here? What about
> "cpu_thread_is_idle" then?

Yes thats better.