From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EAB0C6FD1C for ; Fri, 24 Mar 2023 01:58:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229681AbjCXB6c (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Mar 2023 21:58:32 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:48088 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231135AbjCXB6b (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Mar 2023 21:58:31 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x635.google.com (mail-pl1-x635.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::635]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30D84298F7 for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 18:58:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x635.google.com with SMTP id ix20so576826plb.3 for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 18:58:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1679623109; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:sender:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=TW9r55UPaCY84ZkjUjaKnIlqDJ4KkRU/jbyN19wbqdI=; b=Z24KaTOLUJ8+ko5tFEDybvJ/JnnivxXrwm57g73uArAWAD8ImEna1l6ZzXy++ykqXT e0ZxNHYIRqDluKzEc7XYTjTpXYRH7DVfdoUMeEavDaD34xeIntr0JYeJ/7hLIFMweOht aOlsn6wkU3AiswCpQt7jjUVMcxuLQsLQQRI2xWz9cEPuA1W8q64E7bALQu+tcthG0Ji+ IQYoZOcSjaC+GF5/gudQqh9jYtDPs0Pbhbti0Kyw/S9sPhT2uRucVniRYE2YCcdjH2Q3 EHOYIutRiwBdWoom9lLfQntd0VaTaOF91KvKE5lidzl8XiRPEiUsuYG/DYy5aZQmOWPk PY5Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1679623109; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:sender:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=TW9r55UPaCY84ZkjUjaKnIlqDJ4KkRU/jbyN19wbqdI=; b=CPY6+LK7uYJiRmIS0UHY7wXzhX62UWAaeQeWwNMG54NQC6JX+FUEsQB2W/2Xg+1hTl NOI0qzF3/+vCzozLjW9LEmJwITtBBH0+s9Y9pTCGXnF9Df9Uw2u/wZOiEHFH2Ug8FOKc 4v3DVIFPHZU6sLe8bdhAN1/qeqWaaWKvZXjaSwq1lxwzKh+xflyKWNwJpBSHVkdJWVst 07iyljmA2Cle+daJR1E7g+wUGpJ6Yh58v1Bzdv8U0D62ODyhZb51824+vMDVwPbMTErO lIP354p8VUp1Ov1e9ul7Pvv7h7KbcLaeBHvkvM23g9jstcFg4j6KYT22kAYs9qR0249q jhKQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AAQBX9eH85d2pgJMgj8XY9+uYfNrrIzHNQWGnyCInqapDypldzra0xw8 jwTJME4TXFtlYK22jeTMZ6OE6rdKFo8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AKy350YIi4/qx2CDatunLZxEAqiLbID8O9dBxInSQnU7N5DK1XRFuGxJf3U+W189CWFPUTd/Sb7muA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:4f86:b0:237:9fbd:31c8 with SMTP id qe6-20020a17090b4f8600b002379fbd31c8mr1067293pjb.15.1679623109346; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 18:58:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (2603-800c-1a02-1bae-a7fa-157f-969a-4cde.res6.spectrum.com. [2603:800c:1a02:1bae:a7fa:157f:969a:4cde]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m21-20020a17090ab79500b0023a9564763bsm1865983pjr.29.2023.03.23.18.58.28 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 23 Mar 2023 18:58:29 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Tejun Heo Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2023 15:58:27 -1000 From: Tejun Heo To: Yue Hu Cc: jiangshanlai@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, huyue2@coolpad.com, zhangwen@coolpad.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] workqueue: Drop the NOT_RUNNING check to flags in worker_{set,clr}_flags Message-ID: References: <20230320092652.16649-1-zbestahu@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20230320092652.16649-1-zbestahu@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 05:26:52PM +0800, Yue Hu wrote: > From: Yue Hu > > We know whether the worker flags are belong to WORKER_NOT_RUNNING or not > when we are setting and clearing them. So check the flags not running > related is unnecessary for both the cases. > > Currently, worker_{set,clr}_flags() are all used for WORKER_NOT_RUNNING > except for clearing WORKER_IDLE. Let's change to directly clear it > instead. Also, update the comment a little in worker_clr_flags(). I'm not sure this is better. Semantically, the existing code seems clearer and less error-prone to me and this isn't gonna make any meaningful perf difference. Lai, what do you think? Thanks. -- tejun