Re: [PATCH v1] sched: Fix a typo in scheduler

[Steven Rostedt]

On Sat, 21 May 2022 12:54:20 +0000
Junwen Wu <wudaemon@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> Nice value is MIN_NICE(-20) to MAX_NICE(19), it better uses
> int instead of long.

First of all, the subject is completely incorrect. There's no typo to be
fixed. Second, why do you think it's better to use an int instead of long?
Long is the natural word size of an architecture.

Now perhaps for consistency, we could fix all the locations that switch
between long and int. For example, the sys_nice() definition has nice and
retval as long and are set by functions that return int. But then again,
sys_nice() returns long (and that cannot be changed).

Unless there's a real issue to be fixed (which I do not see one), I'd say
leave it as is, because this change is doing nothing but adding unnecessary
churn to the git repo.

Hence, NAK.

-- Steve


> 
> Signed-off-by: Junwen Wu <wudaemon@xxxxxxx>
> ---
>  include/linux/sched.h | 2 +-
>  kernel/sched/core.c   | 2 +-
>  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> index 75ba8aa60248..cffc7cbed987 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -1830,7 +1830,7 @@ static inline int dl_task_check_affinity(struct task_struct *p, const struct cpu
>  #endif
>  
>  extern int yield_to(struct task_struct *p, bool preempt);
> -extern void set_user_nice(struct task_struct *p, long nice);
> +extern void set_user_nice(struct task_struct *p, int nice);
>  extern int task_prio(const struct task_struct *p);
>  
>  /**
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index fcf0c180617c..15c1b63d771b 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -6888,7 +6888,7 @@ static inline int rt_effective_prio(struct task_struct *p, int prio)
>  }
>  #endif
>  
> -void set_user_nice(struct task_struct *p, long nice)
> +void set_user_nice(struct task_struct *p, int nice)
>  {
>  	bool queued, running;
>  	int old_prio;