public inbox for linux-next@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@google.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
	Jaswinder Singh <jaswinderlinux@gmail.com>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net>,
	Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix linux-next warning from abb74cef
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 12:16:46 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1296505006-26660-1-git-send-email-venki@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110131113820.193a89c5.rdunlap@xenotime.net>

Thanks. Updated to address comments from Randy.

Yes. Patch below should fix the problem.

Fix below warning -
 Introduced by commit abb74cefa9c682fb38ba86c17ca3c86fed6cc464 ("sched:
 Export ns irqtimes through /proc/stat").

After merging the tip tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
ppc64_defconfig) produced these warnings:

kernel/sched.c:3719: warning: 'irqtime_account_idle_ticks' defined but not used
kernel/sched.c:3720: warning: 'irqtime_account_process_tick' defined but not used

Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Signed-off-by: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@google.com>
---
 kernel/sched.c |   64 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------------
 1 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c
index 477e1bc..9a552bd 100644
--- a/kernel/sched.c
+++ b/kernel/sched.c
@@ -3654,6 +3654,36 @@ void account_system_time(struct task_struct *p, int hardirq_offset,
 	__account_system_time(p, cputime, cputime_scaled, target_cputime64);
 }
 
+/*
+ * Account for involuntary wait time.
+ * @cputime: the cpu time spent in involuntary wait
+ */
+void account_steal_time(cputime_t cputime)
+{
+	struct cpu_usage_stat *cpustat = &kstat_this_cpu.cpustat;
+	cputime64_t cputime64 = cputime_to_cputime64(cputime);
+
+	cpustat->steal = cputime64_add(cpustat->steal, cputime64);
+}
+
+/*
+ * Account for idle time.
+ * @cputime: the cpu time spent in idle wait
+ */
+void account_idle_time(cputime_t cputime)
+{
+	struct cpu_usage_stat *cpustat = &kstat_this_cpu.cpustat;
+	cputime64_t cputime64 = cputime_to_cputime64(cputime);
+	struct rq *rq = this_rq();
+
+	if (atomic_read(&rq->nr_iowait) > 0)
+		cpustat->iowait = cputime64_add(cpustat->iowait, cputime64);
+	else
+		cpustat->idle = cputime64_add(cpustat->idle, cputime64);
+}
+
+#ifndef CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING
+
 #ifdef CONFIG_IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING
 /*
  * Account a tick to a process and cpustat
@@ -3715,41 +3745,11 @@ static void irqtime_account_idle_ticks(int ticks)
 	for (i = 0; i < ticks; i++)
 		irqtime_account_process_tick(current, 0, rq);
 }
-#else
+#else /* CONFIG_IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING */
 static void irqtime_account_idle_ticks(int ticks) {}
 static void irqtime_account_process_tick(struct task_struct *p, int user_tick,
 						struct rq *rq) {}
-#endif
-
-/*
- * Account for involuntary wait time.
- * @steal: the cpu time spent in involuntary wait
- */
-void account_steal_time(cputime_t cputime)
-{
-	struct cpu_usage_stat *cpustat = &kstat_this_cpu.cpustat;
-	cputime64_t cputime64 = cputime_to_cputime64(cputime);
-
-	cpustat->steal = cputime64_add(cpustat->steal, cputime64);
-}
-
-/*
- * Account for idle time.
- * @cputime: the cpu time spent in idle wait
- */
-void account_idle_time(cputime_t cputime)
-{
-	struct cpu_usage_stat *cpustat = &kstat_this_cpu.cpustat;
-	cputime64_t cputime64 = cputime_to_cputime64(cputime);
-	struct rq *rq = this_rq();
-
-	if (atomic_read(&rq->nr_iowait) > 0)
-		cpustat->iowait = cputime64_add(cpustat->iowait, cputime64);
-	else
-		cpustat->idle = cputime64_add(cpustat->idle, cputime64);
-}
-
-#ifndef CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING
+#endif /* CONFIG_IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING */
 
 /*
  * Account a single tick of cpu time.
-- 
1.7.3.1

  reply	other threads:[~2011-01-31 20:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-01-31  4:27 linux-next: build warnings after merge of the tip tree Stephen Rothwell
2011-01-31  5:08 ` Jaswinder Singh
2011-01-31 19:12   ` [PATCH] Fix linux-next warning from abb74cef Venkatesh Pallipadi
2011-01-31 19:38     ` Randy Dunlap
2011-01-31 20:16       ` Venkatesh Pallipadi [this message]
2011-01-31 20:25         ` Randy Dunlap

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1296505006-26660-1-git-send-email-venki@google.com \
    --to=venki@google.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jaswinderlinux@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rdunlap@xenotime.net \
    --cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox