On Tue, 2012-09-11 at 11:33 -0700, Suresh Siddha wrote:
> > nohz_balance_enter_idle is good a name too. but I name it as
> > set_nohz_tick_stopped, since there is a clear_nohz_tick_stopped(), that
> > just do the opposed action of this function. According to this, is it
> > better to another functi
On Tue, 2012-09-11 at 09:27 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
> On 09/10/2012 11:26 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2012-09-10 at 15:10 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
> >> There is no load_balancer to be selected now. It just set state of
> >> nohz tick stopping.
> >>
> >> So rename the function, pass the 'c
On 09/10/2012 11:26 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-09-10 at 15:10 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
>> There is no load_balancer to be selected now. It just set state of
>> nohz tick stopping.
>>
>> So rename the function, pass the 'cpu' from parameter and then
>> remove the useless calling from ti
On Mon, 2012-09-10 at 15:10 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
> There is no load_balancer to be selected now. It just set state of
> nohz tick stopping.
>
> So rename the function, pass the 'cpu' from parameter and then
> remove the useless calling from tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick().
Please check who wrote
There is no load_balancer to be selected now. It just set state of
nohz tick stopping.
So rename the function, pass the 'cpu' from parameter and then
remove the useless calling from tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick().
Signed-off-by: Alex Shi
---
include/linux/sched.h|4 ++--
kernel/sched/fa
5 matches
Mail list logo