On 01/10/2013 01:52 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 16:34:39 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
>> On 01/09/2013 03:54 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>>> Hi Alex,
>>>
>>> On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 15:33:40 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
On 01/09/2013 02:50 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> From: Namhyung Kim
>
On 01/10/2013 11:19 AM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> Hi Preeti,
>
> On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 13:51:00 +0530, Preeti U. Murthy wrote:
>> On 01/09/2013 12:20 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>>> From: Namhyung Kim
>>>
>>> AFAICS @target cpu of select_idle_sibling() is always either prev_cpu
>>> or this_cpu. So no
On 01/10/2013 01:52 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 16:34:39 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
On 01/09/2013 03:54 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
Hi Alex,
On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 15:33:40 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
On 01/09/2013 02:50 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
From: Namhyung Kim namhyung@lge.com
On 01/10/2013 11:19 AM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
Hi Preeti,
On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 13:51:00 +0530, Preeti U. Murthy wrote:
On 01/09/2013 12:20 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
From: Namhyung Kim namhyung@lge.com
AFAICS @target cpu of select_idle_sibling() is always either prev_cpu
or this_cpu. So no
On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 16:34:39 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
> On 01/09/2013 03:54 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>> Hi Alex,
>>
>> On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 15:33:40 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
>>> On 01/09/2013 02:50 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
From: Namhyung Kim
AFAICS @target cpu of select_idle_sibling() is
Hi Preeti,
On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 13:51:00 +0530, Preeti U. Murthy wrote:
> On 01/09/2013 12:20 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>> From: Namhyung Kim
>>
>> AFAICS @target cpu of select_idle_sibling() is always either prev_cpu
>> or this_cpu. So no need to check it again and the conditionals can be
>>
On 01/09/2013 03:54 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 15:33:40 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
>> On 01/09/2013 02:50 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>>> From: Namhyung Kim
>>>
>>> AFAICS @target cpu of select_idle_sibling() is always either prev_cpu
>>> or this_cpu. So no need to check
On 01/09/2013 12:20 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> From: Namhyung Kim
>
> AFAICS @target cpu of select_idle_sibling() is always either prev_cpu
> or this_cpu. So no need to check it again and the conditionals can be
> consolidated.
>
> Cc: Mike Galbraith
> Cc: Preeti U Murthy
> Cc: Vincent
On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 15:38:11 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
>>
>> Uh, we don't know if the target is this_cpu or previous cpu, If we just
>> check the target idle status, we may miss another idle cpu. So this
>> patch change the logical in this function.
>
> But, you can fold wake_affine into
On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 15:38:11 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
Uh, we don't know if the target is this_cpu or previous cpu, If we just
check the target idle status, we may miss another idle cpu. So this
patch change the logical in this function.
But, you can fold wake_affine into
On 01/09/2013 12:20 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
From: Namhyung Kim namhyung@lge.com
AFAICS @target cpu of select_idle_sibling() is always either prev_cpu
or this_cpu. So no need to check it again and the conditionals can be
consolidated.
Cc: Mike Galbraith efa...@gmx.de
Cc: Preeti U
On 01/09/2013 03:54 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
Hi Alex,
On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 15:33:40 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
On 01/09/2013 02:50 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
From: Namhyung Kim namhyung@lge.com
AFAICS @target cpu of select_idle_sibling() is always either prev_cpu
or this_cpu. So no need to
Hi Preeti,
On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 13:51:00 +0530, Preeti U. Murthy wrote:
On 01/09/2013 12:20 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
From: Namhyung Kim namhyung@lge.com
AFAICS @target cpu of select_idle_sibling() is always either prev_cpu
or this_cpu. So no need to check it again and the conditionals
On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 16:34:39 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
On 01/09/2013 03:54 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
Hi Alex,
On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 15:33:40 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
On 01/09/2013 02:50 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
From: Namhyung Kim namhyung@lge.com
AFAICS @target cpu of select_idle_sibling() is
Hi Alex,
On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 15:33:40 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
> On 01/09/2013 02:50 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>> From: Namhyung Kim
>>
>> AFAICS @target cpu of select_idle_sibling() is always either prev_cpu
>> or this_cpu. So no need to check it again and the conditionals can be
>> consolidated.
>
> Uh, we don't know if the target is this_cpu or previous cpu, If we just
> check the target idle status, we may miss another idle cpu. So this
> patch change the logical in this function.
But, you can fold wake_affine into select_idle_sibling(). that will save
a complicate calculation
On 01/09/2013 02:50 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> From: Namhyung Kim
>
> AFAICS @target cpu of select_idle_sibling() is always either prev_cpu
> or this_cpu. So no need to check it again and the conditionals can be
> consolidated.
>
> Cc: Mike Galbraith
> Cc: Preeti U Murthy
> Cc: Vincent
From: Namhyung Kim
AFAICS @target cpu of select_idle_sibling() is always either prev_cpu
or this_cpu. So no need to check it again and the conditionals can be
consolidated.
Cc: Mike Galbraith
Cc: Preeti U Murthy
Cc: Vincent Guittot
Cc: Alex Shi
Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim
---
From: Namhyung Kim namhyung@lge.com
AFAICS @target cpu of select_idle_sibling() is always either prev_cpu
or this_cpu. So no need to check it again and the conditionals can be
consolidated.
Cc: Mike Galbraith efa...@gmx.de
Cc: Preeti U Murthy pre...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: Vincent Guittot
On 01/09/2013 02:50 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
From: Namhyung Kim namhyung@lge.com
AFAICS @target cpu of select_idle_sibling() is always either prev_cpu
or this_cpu. So no need to check it again and the conditionals can be
consolidated.
Cc: Mike Galbraith efa...@gmx.de
Cc: Preeti U
Uh, we don't know if the target is this_cpu or previous cpu, If we just
check the target idle status, we may miss another idle cpu. So this
patch change the logical in this function.
But, you can fold wake_affine into select_idle_sibling(). that will save
a complicate calculation whichever
Hi Alex,
On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 15:33:40 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
On 01/09/2013 02:50 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
From: Namhyung Kim namhyung@lge.com
AFAICS @target cpu of select_idle_sibling() is always either prev_cpu
or this_cpu. So no need to check it again and the conditionals can be
22 matches
Mail list logo