On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 06:20:36AM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> Cc: <sta...@vger.kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikb...@gmail.com>
> ---
> kernel/sched/core.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ void update_rq_clock(struct rq *rq)
> {
> s64 delta;
>
Mike,
If I understand this code correctly, skip_clock_update gets set to one,
where it should skip the next call to update_rq_clock(), but only the
next skip_clock_update(), and after that, it should resume calling it again.
Is that correct?
If so, can we add a comment here stating such. For example:
/*
* rq->skip_clock_update gets set to "1" to skip the next clock update.
* The following calls should continue to do the update unless
* rq->skip_clock_update gets set to "1" again.
*/
?
-- Steve
> - if (rq->skip_clock_update > 0)
> + if (rq->skip_clock_update-- > 0)
> return;
>
> delta = sched_clock_cpu(cpu_of(rq)) - rq->clock;
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
