From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750990AbbEDOZZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 May 2015 10:25:25 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:51162 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751007AbbEDOZS (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 May 2015 10:25:18 -0400 Date: Mon, 4 May 2015 16:25:05 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Linux PM list , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Daniel Lezcano Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] sched / idle: Reduce the number of branches in the idle loop Message-ID: <20150504142505.GM23123@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <3084951.QaIkFrZ3VU@vostro.rjw.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3084951.QaIkFrZ3VU@vostro.rjw.lan> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 03:54:43PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > Hi, > > The "reflect" variable that had to be added to cpuidle_idle_call() to fix a > regression during the 4.0 cycle has bothered me a bit since then and guess > what? It is not necessary. > > After the last regression fix related to tick_broadcast_exit() I realized > that it should be possible to eliminate this variable by splitting > cpuidle_idle_call() into smaller routines and reordering the code in > question which is done by this patch series. > > It also gets rid of one more redundant check while at it. Ooh nice! Yes that thing bothered me too. Once you fix that one weird opening bracket: Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel)