[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240124170459.24850-7-frederic@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2024 18:04:50 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>,
Peng Liu <liupeng17@...ovo.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Subject: [PATCH 06/15] tick: No need to clear ts->next_tick again
The tick sched structure is already cleared from
tick_cancel_sched_timer(), so there is no need to clear that field
again.
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
---
kernel/time/tick-sched.c | 5 -----
1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
index 4089bd274d8e..e8e3b5d447e9 100644
--- a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
+++ b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
@@ -1101,11 +1101,6 @@ static bool can_stop_idle_tick(int cpu, struct tick_sched *ts)
if (unlikely(!cpu_online(cpu))) {
if (cpu == tick_do_timer_cpu)
tick_do_timer_cpu = TICK_DO_TIMER_NONE;
- /*
- * Make sure the CPU doesn't get fooled by obsolete tick
- * deadline if it comes back online later.
- */
- ts->next_tick = 0;
return false;
}
--
2.43.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists