>> >> * Mike Galbraith <efa...@gmx.de> wrote: >> >> > On Tue, 2021-03-16 at 19:20 +0800, Wang Qing wrote: >> > > Why not just use wake_up_process(). >> > >> > IMO this is not an improvement. There are other places where explicit >> > TASK_NORMAL is used as well, and they're all perfectly clear as is. >> >> Arguably those could all be converted to wake_up_process() as well. >> It's a very small kernel code size optimization. There's about 3 such >> places, could be converted in a single patch. > >It's still pointless churn IMO.
Using wake_up_process() is more simpler and friendly for beginners, and it is more convenient for analysis and statistics.
