lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Apr]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 29/38] tick-sched: remove wrapper around __tick_nohz_task_switch()
From
On 15 April 2014 04:52, Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 09:53:51PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> __tick_nohz_task_switch() was called only from tick_nohz_task_switch() and there
>> is nothing much in tick_nohz_task_switch() as well. IOW, we don't need
>> unnecessary wrapper over __tick_nohz_task_switch() to be there. Merge all code
>> from __tick_nohz_task_switch() into tick_nohz_task_switch() and move it to
>> tick-sched.c.
>>
>> This also moves check for tick_nohz_tick_stopped() outside of irq_save()
>> context.
>
> No, the wrapper is there on purpose in order to optimize the full dynticks off case in
> the context switch path with the jump label'ed check on tick_nohz_full_enabled().

Just to clarify, you are saying that:

Wrapper was there to save an extra function call when tick_nohz_full_enabled()
returns false, as tick_nohz_task_switch() will be inlined ?

In this case probably we can move !can_stop_full_tick() as well to the wrapper ?


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-04-15 07:21    [W:0.212 / U:5.492 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site