On Thu, 14 Jul 2016, Gaurav Jindal (Gaurav Jindal) wrote: > > tick_nohz_start_idle is called before checking the condition if the idle tick > can be stopped. In case when can_stop_idle_tick returns 0, the function called > is of no use thus a extra call doing nothing. > > Shifting calling of function tick_nohz_start_idle inside the if condition > makes > sure that corresponding operations are done only if idle tick can be actually > stopped. Observance for 1 minute on arm64 architecture shows that shifting > code > can prevent 1.5% of extra calls thus optimizing the idle call sequence.
Nice. > Signed-off-by: gaurav jindal<[email protected]> > Signed-off-by: sanjeev yadav<[email protected]> This SOB chain is wrong. Sanjeev did not send the patch and is not the author. Please clarify. Thanks, tglx
