On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 04:44:14AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> You can move that to tick_sched_do_timer() to avoid code duplication.
I expect the reason I didn't was that it didn't have @ts, but that's
easily fixable.
> Also these constants are very opaque. And even with proper symbols it
> wouldn't look
> right to extend ts->inidle that way.
>
> Perhaps you should add a field such as ts->got_idle_tick under the boolean
> fields
> after the below patch:
> @@ -45,14 +45,17 @@ struct tick_sched {
> struct hrtimer sched_timer;
> unsigned long check_clocks;
> enum tick_nohz_mode nohz_mode;
> +
> + unsigned int inidle : 1;
> + unsigned int tick_stopped : 1;
> + unsigned int idle_active : 1;
> + unsigned int do_timer_last : 1;
That would generate worse code, but yes, the C might be prettier.
