Re: [PATCH 05/15] tick: s/tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick/tick_nohz_full_stop_tick

From: Thomas Gleixner
Date: Thu Jan 25 2024 - 04:35:53 EST

Next message: Thomas Gleixner: "Re: [PATCH 06/15] tick: No need to clear ts->next_tick again"
Previous message: Thomas Gleixner: "Re: [PATCH 02/15] tick/nohz: Remove duplicate between lowres and highres handlers"
In reply to: Frederic Weisbecker: "[PATCH 05/15] tick: s/tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick/tick_nohz_full_stop_tick"
Next in thread: Frederic Weisbecker: "[PATCH 06/15] tick: No need to clear ts->next_tick again"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Wed, Jan 24 2024 at 18:04, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick() is only about nohz_full and not about
> dynticks-idle. Reflect that in the function name to avoid confusion.
>
> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@xxxxxxxxxx>

Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Next message: Thomas Gleixner: "Re: [PATCH 06/15] tick: No need to clear ts->next_tick again"
Previous message: Thomas Gleixner: "Re: [PATCH 02/15] tick/nohz: Remove duplicate between lowres and highres handlers"
In reply to: Frederic Weisbecker: "[PATCH 05/15] tick: s/tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick/tick_nohz_full_stop_tick"
Next in thread: Frederic Weisbecker: "[PATCH 06/15] tick: No need to clear ts->next_tick again"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]