On 06/14/2013 10:20 PM, Alex Shi wrote:
> On 06/07/2013 03:29 PM, Alex Shi wrote:
>> There are some 64 bits variables in cfs_rq/tg etc. That ask expensive
>> operations in 32 bit machine. But in fact, long type is enough for them.
>>
>> So do this change lead more efficient code and without data lo
On 06/07/2013 03:29 PM, Alex Shi wrote:
> There are some 64 bits variables in cfs_rq/tg etc. That ask expersive
> operations in 32 bit machine. But in fact, long type is enough for them.
>
> So do this change lead more efficient code and without data lose.
>
some variable like cfs_rq->runnable_l
On 06/10/2013 10:20 AM, Alex Shi wrote:
> On 06/07/2013 03:29 PM, Alex Shi wrote:
>> > There are some 64 bits variables in cfs_rq/tg etc. That ask expersive
>> > operations in 32 bit machine. But in fact, long type is enough for them.
>> >
>> > So do this change lead more efficient code and withou
On 06/07/2013 03:29 PM, Alex Shi wrote:
> There are some 64 bits variables in cfs_rq/tg etc. That ask expersive
> operations in 32 bit machine. But in fact, long type is enough for them.
>
> So do this change lead more efficient code and without data lose.
BTW, this patch bases on my v8 patchset:
There are some 64 bits variables in cfs_rq/tg etc. That ask expersive
operations in 32 bit machine. But in fact, long type is enough for them.
So do this change lead more efficient code and without data lose.
Regards
Alex
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel"
5 matches
Mail list logo