[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130626130511.GL28407@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 15:05:11 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Li Zhong <zhong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>,
Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] sched: Consolidate open coded preemptible()
checks
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 10:45:41PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> preempt_schedule() and preempt_schedule_context() open
> code their preemptability checks.
>
> Use the standard API instead for consolidation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
> Cc: Li Zhong <zhong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
> Cc: Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>
> Cc: Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>
> Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
> Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
> ---
> kernel/context_tracking.c | 3 +--
> kernel/sched/core.c | 4 +---
> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/context_tracking.c b/kernel/context_tracking.c
> index 6667700..08db730 100644
> --- a/kernel/context_tracking.c
> +++ b/kernel/context_tracking.c
> @@ -88,10 +88,9 @@ void user_enter(void)
> */
> void __sched notrace preempt_schedule_context(void)
> {
> - struct thread_info *ti = current_thread_info();
> enum ctx_state prev_ctx;
>
> - if (likely(ti->preempt_count || irqs_disabled()))
> + if (likely(!preemptible()))
> return;
>
#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT
# define preemptible() (preempt_count() == 0 && !irqs_disabled())
#else
# define preemptible() 0
#endif
Wouldn't that give a problem for !PREEMPT_COUNT?
--
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