Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 1/4] xen: add real time scheduler rtds

[Meng Xu <xumengpanda@xxxxxxxxx>]

2014-09-16 4:52 GMT-04:00 Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>:
>
> >>> On 16.09.14 at 10:42, <dario.faggioli@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Sun, 2014-09-14 at 17:37 -0400, Meng Xu wrote:
> >> --- /dev/null
> >> +++ b/xen/common/sched_rt.c
> >
> >> +/*
> >> + * Init/Free related code
> >> + */
> >> +static int
> >> +rt_init(struct scheduler *ops)
> >> +{
> >> +    struct rt_private *prv = xzalloc(struct rt_private);
> >> +
> >> +    printk("Initializing RTDS scheduler\n" \
> >> +           "WARNING: This is experimental software in development.\n" \
> >> +           "Use at your own risk.\n");
> >>
> > I don't think you need the '\' in this case...
>
> Definitely not. Please drop.
>
> >> +    list_for_each_safe(iter, tmp, runq)
> >> +    {
> >> +        svc = __q_elem(iter);
> >> +
> >> +        if ( now >= svc->cur_deadline )
> >> +        {
> >> +            rt_update_deadline(now, svc);
> >> +            /* reinsert the vcpu if its deadline is updated */
> >> +            __q_remove(svc);
> >> +            __runq_insert(ops, svc);
> >> +        }
> >> +        else
> >> +            break;
> >>
> > Just from an aesthetic perspective, I think I'd have inverted the
> > condition and, hence, the two brances (i.e., "if ( < ) break; else {}").
>
> In which case the "else" and with it one level of indentation
> should go away.


So the code will be like this:

if ( < )
    break;

rt_update_deadline(now, svc);
 /* reinsert the vcpu if its deadline is updated */
 __q_remove(svc);
__runq_insert(ops, svc);


Am I correct? (Just confirm I understand what you said correctly. :-) )

Thanks,

Meng



-- 


-----------
Meng Xu
PhD Student in Computer and Information Science
University of Pennsylvania

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel