From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1422738AbcHEPCH (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 5 Aug 2016 11:02:07 -0400
Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:56938 "EHLO foss.arm.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1422678AbcHEPCE (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 5 Aug 2016 11:02:04 -0400
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2016 16:02:18 +0100
From: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com,
        luca.abeni@unitn.it, xpang@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] sched/deadline: remove useless param from
 setup_new_dl_entity
Message-ID: <20160805150218.GI28125@e106622-lin>
References: <1470391799-22939-1-git-send-email-juri.lelli@arm.com>
 <20160805095643.130194cf@gandalf.local.home>
 <20160805143444.GH28125@e106622-lin>
 <20160805105408.3780d599@gandalf.local.home>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160805105408.3780d599@gandalf.local.home>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 05/08/16 10:54, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Aug 2016 15:34:44 +0100
> Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com> wrote:
> 
> > On 05/08/16 09:56, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > On Fri,  5 Aug 2016 11:09:59 +0100
> > > Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com> wrote:
> > >   
> > > > @@ -1720,19 +1720,28 @@ static void switched_from_dl(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
> > > >   */
> > > >  static void switched_to_dl(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
> > > >  {
> > > > -	if (dl_time_before(p->dl.deadline, rq_clock(rq)))
> > > > -		setup_new_dl_entity(&p->dl, &p->dl);
> > > >  
> > > > -	if (task_on_rq_queued(p) && rq->curr != p) {
> > > > +	if (task_on_rq_queued(p)) {  
> > > 
> > > I always hated functions totally encapsulated by an if statement. This
> > > can be a bit simpler (and less indented) if you have:
> > > 
> > > 	/* If p is not queued, its parameters will be updated at wakeup */
> > > 	if (!task_on_rq_queued(p))
> > > 		return;
> > > 
> > > 	[...]
> > >   
> > 
> > You mean like what follows?
> > 
> > I'll post a v6 if OK.
> > 
> 
> Yes! I think that looks much nicer, and easier to read.
> 

Yep. Way better. :)

> You can add my Reviewed-by tag too.
> 

Thanks!

Best,

- Juri