From c5b9d74246c3fb193431b0dad4da61c2effaab35 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jan Beulich Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 17:20:11 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] _csched_cpu_pick(): simplify sched_smt_power_savings dependent condition At least to me, using ?: instead of the (a && ...) || (!a && ...) construct is far easier to grok with a single look. Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich --- xen/common/sched_credit.c | 7 +++---- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/xen/common/sched_credit.c b/xen/common/sched_credit.c index 1d4d423620..f1e969499f 100644 --- a/xen/common/sched_credit.c +++ b/xen/common/sched_credit.c @@ -526,10 +526,9 @@ _csched_cpu_pick(const struct scheduler *ops, struct vcpu *vc, bool_t commit) weight_cpu = cpus_weight(cpu_idlers); weight_nxt = cpus_weight(nxt_idlers); /* smt_power_savings: consolidate work rather than spreading it */ - if ( ( sched_smt_power_savings - && (weight_cpu > weight_nxt) ) - || ( !sched_smt_power_savings - && (weight_cpu * migrate_factor < weight_nxt) ) ) + if ( sched_smt_power_savings ? + weight_cpu > weight_nxt : + weight_cpu * migrate_factor < weight_nxt ) { cpus_and(nxt_idlers, cpus, nxt_idlers); spc = CSCHED_PCPU(nxt); -- 2.30.2