On Fri, 8 Sep 2006, Siddha, Suresh B wrote:
> > +#endif
> > +}
>
> Is there a reason why this is not made inline?
Just did not think of it.
> > + struct rq *rq;
> > +
> > + if (!cpu_isset(i, *cpus))
> > + continue;
>
> In normal conditions can we make this "cpus" argument NULL and only set/use it
> when we run into pinned condition? That will atleast avoid unnecessary memory
> test bit operations in the normal case.
The balancing operation is not that frequent and having to treat a special
case in the callers would make code more complicated and likely offset the
gains in this function.
Fix up the declaration of cpu_of()
Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
Index: linux-2.6.18-rc5-mm1/kernel/sched.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.18-rc5-mm1.orig/kernel/sched.c 2006-09-08 11:38:35.852594785 -0700
+++ linux-2.6.18-rc5-mm1/kernel/sched.c 2006-09-08 11:39:29.182308471 -0700
@@ -269,7 +269,7 @@ struct rq {
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct rq, runqueues);
-int cpu_of(struct rq *rq)
+static inline int cpu_of(struct rq *rq)
{
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
return rq->cpu;
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
