Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Remove idle_balance() declaration in sched.h

[Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>]

On 02/11/2014 04:46 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 04:33:40PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> On 02/11/2014 04:11 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 04:01:04PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>>>> The idle_balance() function is called within a #ifdef CONFIG_SMP section.
>>>>
>>>> Remove its declaration in sched.h for !CONFIG_SMP because it is pointless.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
>>>
>>> The below again makes a horrible mess of idle_balance() -- which you
>>> tried to clean up.. but it does rid us of some #ifdef goo.
>>>
>>> Hmmm?
>>
>> Yes, it sounds ok.
>>
>> Why is idle_enter_fair() called unconditionally in idle_balance() ?
>> Isn't the call in pick_next_task_idle enough ?  Shouldn't be called when we
>> will go to idle effectively ?
>>
>> If I am not wrong idle_enter_fair() is called from idle_balance() but a task
>> may be pulled, so we the next task won't be the idle task and idle_exit_fair
>> won't be called at put_prev_task.
>>
>> May be I missed this change which was done at purpose in the previous
>> patchset you sent...
>
> lkml.kernel.org/r/CAKfTPtAMmhq0tBpu+pk_uzwrfUM-6Fz4Do1yrzc4NRQS4cZ_-A@mail.gmail.com
>
> I seem to be terminally confused on the subject, but Vincent explains it
> there I think.

Ok, thanks. I will read again the thread carefully.

   -- Daniel


-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog