Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 02/10] rcu: make dead code really dead

[Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>]

* Paul E. McKenney (paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com) wrote:
> From: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
> 
> cleanup: make dead code really dead

Is it just me or this spinlock change is more than just a cleanup ? Or
maybe it just needs a much more descriptive changelog.

Thanks,

Mathieu

> 
> Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
>  kernel/rcutree.c |    4 ++--
>  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.c b/kernel/rcutree.c
> index e54c123..6042fb8 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcutree.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcutree.c
> @@ -1236,11 +1236,11 @@ static void force_quiescent_state(struct rcu_state *rsp, int relaxed)
>  		break; /* grace period idle or initializing, ignore. */
>  
>  	case RCU_SAVE_DYNTICK:
> -
> -		raw_spin_unlock(&rnp->lock);  /* irqs remain disabled */
>  		if (RCU_SIGNAL_INIT != RCU_SAVE_DYNTICK)
>  			break; /* So gcc recognizes the dead code. */
>  
> +		raw_spin_unlock(&rnp->lock);  /* irqs remain disabled */
> +
>  		/* Record dyntick-idle state. */
>  		force_qs_rnp(rsp, dyntick_save_progress_counter);
>  		raw_spin_lock(&rnp->lock);  /* irqs already disabled */
> -- 
> 1.7.0
> 

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com