[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1236184389.5937.40.camel@desktop>
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 08:33:09 -0800
From: Daniel Walker <dwalker@...o99.com>
To: arun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, ego@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...e.hu, andi@...stfloor.org, venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com,
vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, arjan@...radead.org,
svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [v2 PATCH 4/4] timers: logic to enable timer migration.
On Wed, 2009-03-04 at 17:49 +0530, Arun R Bharadwaj wrote:
> @@ -649,6 +650,16 @@ __mod_timer(struct timer_list *timer, un
>
> new_base = __get_cpu_var(tvec_bases);
>
> + current_cpu = smp_processor_id();
> + preferred_cpu = get_nohz_load_balancer();
> + if (enable_timer_migration && !tbase_get_pinned(timer->base)
> &&
> + idle_cpu(current_cpu) && preferred_cpu != -1)
> {
> + new_base = per_cpu(tvec_bases, preferred_cpu);
> + timer_set_base(timer, new_base);
> + timer->expires = expires;
> + internal_add_timer(new_base, timer);
> + goto out_unlock;
> + }
Are you sure this compiles w/ CONFIG_SMP=n ? It looks like
enable_timer_migration wouldn't exist in that case, but the chunks your
adding in the timer code are still using it.
Daniel
--
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