On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote:
>>>> On 18.06.16 at 01:12, <dario.faggi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> @@ -1484,6 +1489,23 @@ csched2_cpu_pick(const struct scheduler *ops, struct
>> vcpu *vc)
>> out_up:
>> spin_unlock(&prv->lock);
>>
>> + /* TRACE */
>> + {
>> + struct {
>> + uint64_t b_avgload;
>> + unsigned vcpu:16, dom:16;
>> + unsigned rq_id:16, new_cpu:16;
>> + } d;
>> + d.b_avgload = prv->rqd[min_rqi].b_avgload;
>> + d.dom = vc->domain->domain_id;
>> + d.vcpu = vc->vcpu_id;
>> + d.rq_id = c2r(ops, new_cpu);
>> + d.new_cpu = new_cpu;
>
> I guess this follows pre-existing style, but it would seem more natural
> to me for the variable to have an initializer instead of this series of
> assignments.
Well that doesn't actually save you that much typing, and I think it's
probably (slightly) less easy to read. But the biggest thing at this
point is that it's inconsistent with what's there. :-)
-George
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
