On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 08:43:36PM +0000 Vineeth Remanan Pillai wrote: > > A minor nitpick. I find keeping the vruntime base readjustment in > > core_prio_less probably is more straight forward rather than pass a > > core_cmp bool around. > > The reason I moved the vruntime base adjustment to __prio_less is > because, the vruntime seemed alien to __prio_less when looked as > a standalone function. > > I do not have a strong opinion on both. Probably a better approach > would be to replace both cpu_prio_less/core_prio_less with prio_less > which takes the third arguement 'bool on_same_rq'? >
Fwiw, I find the two names easier to read than a boolean flag. Could still be wrapped to a single implementation I suppose. An enum to control cpu or core would be more readable, but probably overkill... Cheers, Phil > Thanks --
