Re: [PATCH 12/20 v3] sched/fair: Support not wakeup case in select_idle_sibling

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential
issue to consider:
- [Low] sched/fair: kernel-doc parameter mismatch for @rq in
  idle_rq_without()
--

commit ab3889b91b4dc4e984d6982f09014756fc8d7899
Author: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>

sched/fair: Support not wakeup case in select_idle_sibling

This commit updates choose_idle_cpu() to check whether a runqueue would be
idle without an already-enqueued task p, and renames idle_cpu_without() to
idle_rq_without() to take a struct rq pointer.

> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index f2a0d2c2bb632..980eda9c935a8 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c

[ ... ]

> @@ -12968,23 +12985,21 @@ static unsigned int task_running_on_cpu(int cpu, struct task_struct *p)
>  }
>  
>  /**
> - * idle_cpu_without - would a given CPU be idle without p ?
> + * idle_rq_without - would a given CPU be idle without p ?
>   * @cpu: the processor on which idleness is tested.
>   * @p: task which should be ignored.
>   *
>   * Return: 1 if the CPU would be idle. 0 otherwise.
>   */
> -static int idle_cpu_without(int cpu, struct task_struct *p)
> +static int idle_rq_without(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)

[Severity: Low]
Should the kernel-doc comment for idle_rq_without() document @rq instead
of @cpu to match the updated parameter list and avoid W=1 kernel-doc
warnings?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261106151947.3991524-2-vincent.guittot@linaro.org?part=12