Re: [PATCH 29/38] tick-sched: remove wrapper around __tick_nohz_task_switch()

[Viresh Kumar]

On 15 April 2014 04:52, Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 09:53:51PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> __tick_nohz_task_switch() was called only from tick_nohz_task_switch() and there
>> is nothing much in tick_nohz_task_switch() as well. IOW, we don't need
>> unnecessary wrapper over __tick_nohz_task_switch() to be there. Merge all code
>> from __tick_nohz_task_switch() into tick_nohz_task_switch() and move it to
>> tick-sched.c.
>>
>> This also moves check for tick_nohz_tick_stopped() outside of irq_save()
>> context.
>
> No, the wrapper is there on purpose in order to optimize the full dynticks off case in
> the context switch path with the jump label'ed check on tick_nohz_full_enabled().

Just to clarify, you are saying that:

Wrapper was there to save an extra function call when tick_nohz_full_enabled()
returns false, as tick_nohz_task_switch() will be inlined ?

In this case probably we can move !can_stop_full_tick() as well to the wrapper ?
--
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/