Re: [PATCH 0/2] swait: add idle to make idle-hacks on kthreads explicit

["Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>]

On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 09:48:46AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 02:45:45PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > In this proper patch form I've made the non-timeout idle swait void.
> > I've also integrated Paul's comment / ident changes, and added documentation
> > as suggested by Boqun.
> > 
> > Let me know if there are issue, otherwise, Paul feel free to take!
> 
> Nice docbook comments!  I replaced my modified commits with your new ones,
> queued for further review and testing.

Great thanks!

> Just out of curiosity, why the three-line swait_event_idle() with the
> "break" statement instead of the two-line version with the inverted
> condition?  (I am fine either way, just curious.)

No strong reason -- just went with what swait.h already used before on
similar condition before, in this case it follows swait_event() model.
In the future it may be possible to share a very nasty macro for both
but since that would involve using a helper function as an argument
I deferred that at this point -- it'd be ugly.

  Luis