On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 03:09:38AM -0700, Paul Turner wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 9:01 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > + struct sg_lb_stats *this, *busiest;
>
> "this" is a little confusing to read; mainly because elsewhere we've
> tied this to "this cpu" whereas the local sched group is
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Paul Turner wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 7:56 PM, Lei Wen wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:01 AM, Peter Zijlstra
>> wrote:
>>> From: Joonsoo Kim
>>>
>>> There is no reason to maintain separate variables for this_group
>>> and busiest_group in sd_lb_sta
On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 7:56 PM, Lei Wen wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:01 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> From: Joonsoo Kim
>>
>> There is no reason to maintain separate variables for this_group
>> and busiest_group in sd_lb_stat, except saving some space.
>> But this structure is always allo
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:01 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> From: Joonsoo Kim
>
> There is no reason to maintain separate variables for this_group
> and busiest_group in sd_lb_stat, except saving some space.
> But this structure is always allocated in stack, so this saving
> isn't really benificial
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 9:01 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> From: Joonsoo Kim
>
> There is no reason to maintain separate variables for this_group
> and busiest_group in sd_lb_stat, except saving some space.
> But this structure is always allocated in stack, so this saving
> isn't really benificial
From: Joonsoo Kim
There is no reason to maintain separate variables for this_group
and busiest_group in sd_lb_stat, except saving some space.
But this structure is always allocated in stack, so this saving
isn't really benificial [peterz: reducing stack space is good; in this
case readability inc
6 matches
Mail list logo