Re: Re: [PATCH] sched: swait: use wake_up_process() instead of wake_up_state()

2021-03-17 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Thu, 2021-03-18 at 10:14 +0800, 王擎 wrote: > >> > >> * Mike Galbraith 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

Re: [PATCH] sched: swait: use wake_up_process() instead of wake_up_state()

2021-03-17 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Wed, Mar 17 2021 at 11:41, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Wed, 2021-03-17 at 10:46 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> * Mike Galbraith 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

Re: [PATCH] sched: swait: use wake_up_process() instead of wake_up_state()

2021-03-17 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Wed, 2021-03-17 at 10:46 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Mike Galbraith 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

Re: [PATCH] sched: swait: use wake_up_process() instead of wake_up_state()

2021-03-17 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 10:46:18AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Mike Galbraith 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

Re: [PATCH] sched: swait: use wake_up_process() instead of wake_up_state()

2021-03-17 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Mike Galbraith 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

Re: [PATCH] sched: swait: use wake_up_process() instead of wake_up_state()

2021-03-16 Thread Mike Galbraith
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. > Signed-off-by: Wang Qing > --- > kernel/sched/swait.c | 2 +- >