On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 02:55:22PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > > @@ -4540,17 +4568,8 @@ static void cpu_load_update(struct rq *this_rq, > > > unsigned long this_load, > > > > > > /* scale is effectively 1 << i now, and >> i divides by scale */ > > > > > > - old_load = this_rq->cpu_load[i]; > > #ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON > > > - old_load = decay_load_missed(old_load, pending_updates - 1, i); > > > - if (tickless_load) { > > > - old_load -= decay_load_missed(tickless_load, > > > pending_updates - 1, i); > > > - /* > > > - * old_load can never be a negative value because a > > > - * decayed tickless_load cannot be greater than the > > > - * original tickless_load. > > > - */ > > > - old_load += tickless_load; > > > - } > > #endif > > Ah sure, if you prefer it that way, I can do that.
Yes please. I normally favour the thing you did, but here it makes tricky code that much harder to read.