From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751341AbeFAGas (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jun 2018 02:30:48 -0400 Received: from lgeamrelo12.lge.com ([156.147.23.52]:37754 "EHLO lgeamrelo11.lge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750821AbeFAGar (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jun 2018 02:30:47 -0400 X-Original-SENDERIP: 156.147.1.121 X-Original-MAILFROM: byungchul.park@lge.com X-Original-SENDERIP: 10.177.220.135 X-Original-MAILFROM: byungchul.park@lge.com Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v3 1/2] sched/deadline: Add cpudl_maximum_dl() for clean-up To: Joel Fernandes Cc: Peter Zijlstra , mingo@kernel.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, tglx@linutronix.de, raistlin@linux.it, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, juri.lelli@gmail.com, bristot@redhat.com, kernel-team@lge.com References: <1515392081-32320-1-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com> <20180111090716.GV6176@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20180509063322.GA29160@X58A-UD3R> <536cd801-03e5-a1de-605b-a6ed0f95b4a9@lge.com> <6617f569-6c2f-509c-328e-fad3db73f5df@lge.com> <20180601060243.GA184458@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com> From: Byungchul Park Message-ID: <26632e11-a1dd-5cf5-914b-1ba697c8620d@lge.com> Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 15:30:43 +0900 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180601060243.GA184458@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2018-06-01 15:02, Joel Fernandes wrote: > On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 12:07:48PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: >> >> >> On 2018-05-25 14:13, Byungchul Park wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 2018-05-09 15:33, Byungchul Park wrote: >>>> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 10:07:16AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sorry for the huge delay on this, but I'll have to postpone further. >>>>> Still busy with meltdown/spectre stuff. >>>> >>>> Please consider this. Even though it's not a big bug, anyway leading >>>> mis-behavior in certain situaions. >>> >>> Could you see this patches, it's been too long since the start tho? >> >> Please, any opinion. > > Just my opinion: this patch [1] is just a cosmetic change. I would argue that > there's no readability improvement by wrapping up elements[0].dl. Infact I > even feel that the elements[0].cpu should directly be accessed since both > .cpu and .dl for the 0th element are directly accessed only from one place > (cpudl_find) and only one time, and explicitly accessing index 0 makes it > more clear that this is the root of the max-heap. > > IOW I don't see any benefit in hiding it behind a wrapper which hides the > fact that we're accessing the root of the max heap, but I don't terribly hate > this patch and I'm Ok if maintainers and other reviewers think its worth it. Hi Joel, Talking about the *1st patch*, no matter whether denied or not, even though I think it looks weird to abstract only p->elements[0].cpu with a function, but not cp->elements[0].dl. > thanks, > > - Joel > > [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10149099/ > > -- Thanks, Byungchul