[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1473066782-19372-2-git-send-email-sgruszka@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 11:13:01 +0200
From: Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@...hat.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Giovanni Gherdovich <ggherdovich@...e.cz>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Mike Galbraith <mgalbraith@...e.de>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@...mail.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@...hat.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/2] sched/cputime: Use only pi_lock to protect sum_exec_runtime read
Currently we protect 64bit sum_exec_runtime read on 32bit cpus using
task_rq_lock() which internally takes t->pi_lock and rq->lock. Taking
rq->lock is not needed in this case.
Signed-off-by: Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@...hat.com>
---
kernel/sched/cputime.c | 7 +++----
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/cputime.c b/kernel/sched/cputime.c
index b93c72d..5535774 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/cputime.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/cputime.c
@@ -315,12 +315,11 @@ static inline u64 read_sum_exec_runtime(struct task_struct *t)
static u64 read_sum_exec_runtime(struct task_struct *t)
{
u64 ns;
- struct rq_flags rf;
- struct rq *rq;
+ unsigned long flags;
- rq = task_rq_lock(t, &rf);
+ raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&t->pi_lock, flags);
ns = t->se.sum_exec_runtime;
- task_rq_unlock(rq, t, &rf);
+ raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&t->pi_lock, flags);
return ns;
}
--
1.8.3.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists