Re: [patch V2 05/10] timer: Retrieve next expiry of pinned/non-pinned timers seperately

Thomas Gleixner
2017-04-19T09:56:22Z

On Wed, 19 Apr 2017, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 01:11:07PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * If the local queue expires first, there is no requirement for
> > + * queuing the CPU in the global expiry mechanism.
>
> The comment doesn't make sense... (maybe at this stage)

Yeah, it's only useful once the real magic is in place.

> > + */
> > + if (!local_first && !global_empty)
> > + *global_evt = basem + (nextevt_global - basej) * TICK_NSEC;
>
> I was initially thinking !local_first would have to imply !global_empty,
> but after going back and reading the previous patches again, I found
> this was not so. Still slightly surprising.

Indeed, that's confusing.

Thanks,

tglx