Re: [patch V2 05/10] timer: Retrieve next expiry of pinned/non-pinned timers seperately

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Wed, 19 Apr 2017, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 01:11:07PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * If the local queue expires first, there is no requirement for
> > +	 * queuing the CPU in the global expiry mechanism.
> 
> The comment doesn't make sense... (maybe at this stage)

Yeah, it's only useful once the real magic is in place.

> > +	 */
> > +	if (!local_first && !global_empty)
> > +		*global_evt = basem + (nextevt_global - basej) * TICK_NSEC;
> 
> I was initially thinking !local_first would have to imply !global_empty,
> but after going back and reading the previous patches again, I found
> this was not so. Still slightly surprising.

Indeed, that's confusing.

Thanks,

	tglx