linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] sched: apply ifdef CONFIG_SMP to meaningful code only on SMP system

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160826030018.GA2279@X58A-UD3R>
Date:   Fri, 26 Aug 2016 12:00:19 +0900
From:   Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
To:     mingo@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] sched: apply ifdef CONFIG_SMP to meaningful code
 only on SMP system

On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 03:56:59PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 05, 2015 at 06:43:31PM +0900, byungchul.park@....com wrote:
> > From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
> 
> Hello,
> 
> This patch was rejected and the next version having tried to apply what
> peterz recommanded, was almost ignored last year. But now, exactly same
> thing is already in the tree which was posted by Tim Chen. Yes. This is
> a trivial one, I thus don't mind much. Commiting patches is not important.

I meant that "Whether my patches are commited or not is not important".

> However, I want to ask you to treat patches by new one like me with more
> consideration, please. Sometimes I feel thankful while sometimes I feel
> disappointed with a happening like this. It would be appriciated if you
> do so.
> 
> Thank you,
> Byungchul
> 
> > 
> > account_numa_dequeue and manipulating se->group_node are meaningful only on SMP
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
> > ---
> >  kernel/sched/fair.c |    4 +++-
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > index 09456fc..93b8de6 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > @@ -2337,15 +2337,17 @@ account_entity_dequeue(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se)
> >  	update_load_sub(&cfs_rq->load, se->load.weight);
> >  	if (!parent_entity(se))
> >  		update_load_sub(&rq_of(cfs_rq)->load, se->load.weight);
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> >  	if (entity_is_task(se)) {
> >  		account_numa_dequeue(rq_of(cfs_rq), task_of(se));
> >  		list_del_init(&se->group_node);
> >  	}
> > +#endif
> >  	cfs_rq->nr_running--;
> >  }
> >  
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED
> > -# ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> >  static inline long calc_tg_weight(struct task_group *tg, struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
> >  {
> >  	long tg_weight;
> > -- 
> > 1.7.9.5
> > 
> > --
> > 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/