[PATCH 0/1] timers: internal_add_timer() should update->next_timer if ->active_timers == 0

From: Oleg Nesterov
Date: Wed Jan 15 2014 - 12:31:48 EST

Next message: Oleg Nesterov: "[PATCH 1/1] timers: internal_add_timer() should update->next_timer if ->active_timers == 0"
Previous message: mark . doffman: "[PATCH v2 1/2] init: Add a new root device option, the Ceph file system"
In reply to: Oleg Nesterov: "Re: [PATCH tip/core/timers 4/4] timers: Reduce future__run_timers() latency for first add to empty list"
Next in thread: Oleg Nesterov: "[PATCH 1/1] timers: internal_add_timer() should update->next_timer if ->active_timers == 0"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On 01/15, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> This is funny, but I already have the same change for ->next_timer,
> if we add this optimization perhaps that trivial patch makes sense
> too.

Please see 1/1, it should not conflict with your changes.

Oleg.

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

Next message: Oleg Nesterov: "[PATCH 1/1] timers: internal_add_timer() should update->next_timer if ->active_timers == 0"
Previous message: mark . doffman: "[PATCH v2 1/2] init: Add a new root device option, the Ceph file system"
In reply to: Oleg Nesterov: "Re: [PATCH tip/core/timers 4/4] timers: Reduce future__run_timers() latency for first add to empty list"
Next in thread: Oleg Nesterov: "[PATCH 1/1] timers: internal_add_timer() should update->next_timer if ->active_timers == 0"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]