[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1314632191.2816.95.camel@twins>
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 17:36:31 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@....ibm.com>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Tim Pepper <lnxninja@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/32] nohz/cpuset: Don't turn off the tick if rcu needs
it
On Mon, 2011-08-15 at 17:52 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> @@ -2446,6 +2447,19 @@ bool cpuset_nohz_can_stop_tick(void)
> if (rq->nr_running > 1)
> return false;
>
> + cpu = smp_processor_id();
> +
> + /*
> + * FIXME: will probably be removed soon as it's
> + * already checked from tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick()
> + */
> + if (rcu_needs_cpu(cpu))
> + return false;
> +
> + /* Is there a grace period to complete ? */
> + if (rcu_pending(cpu))
> + return false;
> +
> return true;
> }
This really shouldn't live in sched.c, also I would have expected
tick_nohz_can_stop_tick() to do this, its named like it does this.
--
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