Re: [RFC PATCH v3 0/5] Tunable sched_mc_power_savings=n

[Peter Zijlstra]

a quick response, I'll read them more carefully tomorrow:

 - why are the preferred cpu things pointers? afaict using just the cpu
number is both smaller and clearer to the reader.

 - in patch 5/5 you do:

+               spin_unlock(&this_rq->lock);
+               double_rq_lock(this_rq, busiest);

we call that double_lock_balance()

 - comments go like:

 /*
  * this is a multi-
  * line comment
  */



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/