[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090226170738.a982057b.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:07:38 +0900
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpuacct: add a branch prediction
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 15:40:15 +0800
Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> cpuacct_charge() is in fast-path, and checking of !cpuacct_susys.active
> always returns false after cpuacct has been initialized at system boot.
>
> Signed-off-by: Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
> ---
> kernel/sched.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c
> index 410eec4..fd2f7fc 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched.c
> @@ -9589,7 +9589,7 @@ static void cpuacct_charge(struct task_struct *tsk, u64 cputime)
> struct cpuacct *ca;
> int cpu;
>
> - if (!cpuacct_subsys.active)
> + if (unlikely(!cpuacct_subsys.active))
> return;
>
(Just curious)
I wonder "ca = task_ca(tsk)" will return NULL if cpuacct subsys is not initalized.
Then, can we just remove this check ?
Thanks,
-Kame
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists