From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932305Ab1HFAXG (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Aug 2011 20:23:06 -0400 Received: from mail-pz0-f42.google.com ([209.85.210.42]:45194 "EHLO mail-pz0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757307Ab1HFAKT (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Aug 2011 20:10:19 -0400 Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2011 08:10:04 +0800 From: Yong Zhang To: Steven Rostedt Cc: LKML , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Peter Zijlstra , Mike Galbraith , Luis Claudio =?utf-8?B?Ui4gR29u77+9YWx2ZXM=?= , Matthew Hank Sabins , Gregory Haskins , Andrew Morton Subject: [PATCH V2] sched/cpupri: Remove cpupri->pri_active Message-ID: <20110806001004.GA2207@zhy> Reply-To: Yong Zhang References: <1312317372.18583.101.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <20110805082008.GA6628@zhy> <1312547447.18583.195.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <20110805143822.GA3199@zhy> <1312558000.18583.201.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1312558000.18583.201.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 11:26:40AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Fri, 2011-08-05 at 22:38 +0800, Yong Zhang wrote: > > > Signed-off-by: Yong Zhang > > --- > > kernel/sched_cpupri.c | 3 --- > > kernel/sched_cpupri.h | 2 -- > > 2 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/kernel/sched_cpupri.c b/kernel/sched_cpupri.c > > index 90faffd..5839559 100644 > > --- a/kernel/sched_cpupri.c > > +++ b/kernel/sched_cpupri.c > > @@ -151,9 +151,6 @@ void cpupri_set(struct cpupri *cp, int cpu, int newpri) > > /* > > * If the cpu was currently mapped to a different value, we > > * need to map it to the new value then remove the old value. > > - * Note, we must add the new value first, otherwise we risk the > > - * cpu being cleared from pri_active, and this cpu could be > > - * missed for a push or pull. > > Actually, the above still holds true, just not for pri_active. Probably > should be changed to: > > * Note, we must add the new value first, otherwise we risk the > * cpu being missed by the priority loop in cpupri_find. > > or something as such. Updated. Thanks, Yong --- From: Yong Zhang Subject: [PATCH V2] sched/cpupri: Remove cpupri->pri_active Since [sched/cpupri: Remove the vec->lock], member pri_active of struct cpupri is not needed any more, just remove it. Also clean stuff related to it. Signed-off-by: Yong Zhang --- kernel/sched_cpupri.c | 3 +-- kernel/sched_cpupri.h | 2 -- 2 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/sched_cpupri.c b/kernel/sched_cpupri.c index 90faffd..a86cf9d 100644 --- a/kernel/sched_cpupri.c +++ b/kernel/sched_cpupri.c @@ -152,8 +152,7 @@ void cpupri_set(struct cpupri *cp, int cpu, int newpri) * If the cpu was currently mapped to a different value, we * need to map it to the new value then remove the old value. * Note, we must add the new value first, otherwise we risk the - * cpu being cleared from pri_active, and this cpu could be - * missed for a push or pull. + * cpu being missed by the priority loop in cpupri_find. */ if (likely(newpri != CPUPRI_INVALID)) { struct cpupri_vec *vec = &cp->pri_to_cpu[newpri]; diff --git a/kernel/sched_cpupri.h b/kernel/sched_cpupri.h index 6b4cd17..f6d7561 100644 --- a/kernel/sched_cpupri.h +++ b/kernel/sched_cpupri.h @@ -4,7 +4,6 @@ #include #define CPUPRI_NR_PRIORITIES (MAX_RT_PRIO + 2) -#define CPUPRI_NR_PRI_WORDS BITS_TO_LONGS(CPUPRI_NR_PRIORITIES) #define CPUPRI_INVALID -1 #define CPUPRI_IDLE 0 @@ -18,7 +17,6 @@ struct cpupri_vec { struct cpupri { struct cpupri_vec pri_to_cpu[CPUPRI_NR_PRIORITIES]; - long pri_active[CPUPRI_NR_PRI_WORDS]; int cpu_to_pri[NR_CPUS]; }; -- 1.7.1