Re: [PATCH v2] lib/flex_proportions.c: cleanup __fprop_inc_percpu_max

[Jan Kara]

On Sat 09-05-20 14:12:33, Tan Hu wrote:
> If the given type has fraction smaller than max_frac/FPROP_FRAC_BASE,
> the code could be modified to call __fprop_inc_percpu() directly and
> easier to understand. After this patch, fprop_reflect_period_percpu()
> will be called twice, and quicky return on pl->period == p->period
> test, so it would not result to significant downside of performance.
> 
> Thanks for Jan's guidance.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tan Hu <tan.hu@xxxxxxxxxx>

Thanks for the patch. It looks good to me. You can add:

Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>

								Honza

> ---
>  lib/flex_proportions.c | 7 +++----
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/flex_proportions.c b/lib/flex_proportions.c
> index 7852bfff5..451543937 100644
> --- a/lib/flex_proportions.c
> +++ b/lib/flex_proportions.c
> @@ -266,8 +266,7 @@ void __fprop_inc_percpu_max(struct fprop_global *p,
>  		if (numerator >
>  		    (((u64)denominator) * max_frac) >> FPROP_FRAC_SHIFT)
>  			return;
> -	} else
> -		fprop_reflect_period_percpu(p, pl);
> -	percpu_counter_add_batch(&pl->events, 1, PROP_BATCH);
> -	percpu_counter_add(&p->events, 1);
> +	}
> +
> +	__fprop_inc_percpu(p, pl);
>  }
> -- 
> 2.19.1
> 
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR