[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKohponPJO+RGaCG8HC9d3iNKhV35Ss33XAdcQ6qus5ybeDuTQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2014 20:53:51 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Chris Redpath <Chris.Redpath@....com>
Cc: "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
"fweisbec@...il.com" <fweisbec@...il.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Arvind Chauhan <Arvind.Chauhan@....com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC 7/7] net: don't check for active hrtimer after adding it
On 9 July 2014 16:14, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
> Yeah, it looks like we can get rid of this. Also,
>
> } while (t.task && pkt_dev->running && !signal_pending(current));
>
> is present in the closing "}" of do-while loop and probably we
> don't need to check t.task here as well.
Actually No. t.task is modified from hrtimer handler and so this check
would stay:
Diff I have added to this patch:
diff --git a/net/core/pktgen.c b/net/core/pktgen.c
index f911acd..cc2694e 100644
--- a/net/core/pktgen.c
+++ b/net/core/pktgen.c
@@ -2187,8 +2187,7 @@ static void spin(struct pktgen_dev *pkt_dev,
ktime_t spin_until)
set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
hrtimer_start_expires(&t.timer, HRTIMER_MODE_ABS);
- if (likely(t.task))
- schedule();
+ schedule();
hrtimer_cancel(&t.timer);
} while (t.task && pkt_dev->running &&
!signal_pending(current));
--
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