Re: [PATCH] sched/cpupri: Remove cpupri->pri_active

[Steven Rostedt]

On Fri, 2011-08-05 at 22:38 +0800, Yong Zhang wrote:

> Signed-off-by: Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  kernel/sched_cpupri.c |    3 ---
>  kernel/sched_cpupri.h |    2 --
>  2 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched_cpupri.c b/kernel/sched_cpupri.c
> index 90faffd..5839559 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched_cpupri.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched_cpupri.c
> @@ -151,9 +151,6 @@ void cpupri_set(struct cpupri *cp, int cpu, int newpri)
>  	/*
>  	 * If the cpu was currently mapped to a different value, we
>  	 * need to map it to the new value then remove the old value.
> -	 * Note, we must add the new value first, otherwise we risk the
> -	 * cpu being cleared from pri_active, and this cpu could be
> -	 * missed for a push or pull.

Actually, the above still holds true, just not for pri_active. Probably
should be changed to:

	* Note, we must add the new value first, otherwise we risk the
	* cpu being missed by the priority loop in cpupri_find.

or something as such.

>  	 */
>  	if (likely(newpri != CPUPRI_INVALID)) {
>  		struct cpupri_vec *vec = &cp->pri_to_cpu[newpri];
> diff --git a/kernel/sched_cpupri.h b/kernel/sched_cpupri.h
> index 6b4cd17..f6d7561 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched_cpupri.h
> +++ b/kernel/sched_cpupri.h
> @@ -4,7 +4,6 @@
>  #include <linux/sched.h>
>  
>  #define CPUPRI_NR_PRIORITIES	(MAX_RT_PRIO + 2)
> -#define CPUPRI_NR_PRI_WORDS	BITS_TO_LONGS(CPUPRI_NR_PRIORITIES)
>  
>  #define CPUPRI_INVALID -1
>  #define CPUPRI_IDLE     0
> @@ -18,7 +17,6 @@ struct cpupri_vec {
>  
>  struct cpupri {
>  	struct cpupri_vec pri_to_cpu[CPUPRI_NR_PRIORITIES];
> -	long              pri_active[CPUPRI_NR_PRI_WORDS];
>  	int               cpu_to_pri[NR_CPUS];
>  };
>  


Otherwise looks good.

-- Steve


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/