[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 01/19] xen: sched: leave CPUs doing tasklet work alone.
On Mon, 2016-06-20 at 01:48 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > On 18.06.16 at 01:11, <dario.faggioli@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > --- a/xen/common/sched_credit.c > > +++ b/xen/common/sched_credit.c > > @@ -1819,24 +1819,24 @@ csched_schedule( > > else > > snext = csched_load_balance(prv, cpu, snext, > > &ret.migrated); > > > > + out: > > /* > > * Update idlers mask if necessary. When we're idling, other > > CPUs > > * will tickle us when they get extra work. > > */ > > - if ( snext->pri == CSCHED_PRI_IDLE ) > > + if ( tasklet_work_scheduled || snext->pri != CSCHED_PRI_IDLE ) > > { > > - if ( !cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, prv->idlers) ) > > - cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, prv->idlers); > > + if ( cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, prv->idlers) ) > > + cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, prv->idlers); > > } > > - else if ( cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, prv->idlers) ) > > + else if ( !cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, prv->idlers) ) > > { > > - cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, prv->idlers); > > + cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, prv->idlers); > > } > Is there a reason for this extra code churn? It would seem to me > that the change could be just the "out" label movement and > adjustment to the first if: > > if ( !tasklet_work_scheduled && snext->pri == CSCHED_PRI_IDLE ) > > Am I overlooking something? > No, you are not. It indeed can be done as you suggest, and it's better, so I'll go for it. Thanks and regards, Dario -- <<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK) Attachment:
signature.asc _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |