On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 05:14:53PM -0800, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 7:55 AM Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > + if (state_mask & (1 << s))
> >
> > We have the BIT() macro, but I'm honestly not sure that will improve
> > things.
>
> I was mimicking the rest of the c
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 7:55 AM Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 09:15:06AM -0800, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > The psi monitoring patches will need to determine the same states as
> > record_times(). To avoid calculating them twice, maintain a state mask
> > that can be consulte
On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 09:15:06AM -0800, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> The psi monitoring patches will need to determine the same states as
> record_times(). To avoid calculating them twice, maintain a state mask
> that can be consulted cheaply. Do this in a separate patch to keep the
> churn in the
The psi monitoring patches will need to determine the same states as
record_times(). To avoid calculating them twice, maintain a state mask
that can be consulted cheaply. Do this in a separate patch to keep the
churn in the main feature patch at a minimum.
Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan
---
i
