Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 01:45:58 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: David Newall <davidn@davidnewall.com>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
       Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] (latest tip) make dequeue_task less confusing
Message-ID: <20090313004558.GD19544@elte.hu>
References: <49B8CE2B.8070402@davidnewall.com> <20090312095518.GB16721@elte.hu> <1236864997.6075.22.camel@marge.simson.net> <49B94E43.6000405@davidnewall.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <49B94E43.6000405@davidnewall.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 628
Lines: 20


* David Newall <davidn@davidnewall.com> wrote:

> Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > Is there any real gain from doing this?  It messes up the symmetry of
> > enqueue/dequeue.
> 
> 
> No.  On further consideration, I don't like my patch.

With the __dequeue_task()+inline suggestion i made i think it 
would be a micro-optimization and would not break symmetry in a 
significant way.

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/