From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756815Ab1HEP0r (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Aug 2011 11:26:47 -0400 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122]:62383 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752566Ab1HEP0q (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Aug 2011 11:26:46 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=Pm0sEXe2MdIPK/rOEC7hwDW84D/yDsPO3JtCzsVYOFU= c=1 sm=0 a=vn9O8SEpdqYA:10 a=5SG0PmZfjMsA:10 a=Q9fys5e9bTEA:10 a=OPBmh+XkhLl+Enan7BmTLg==:17 a=pGLkceISAAAA:8 a=XgS40gwUCIYEoqc6sL8A:9 a=zpbxpyy5fl8F2DrueAEA:7 a=PUjeQqilurYA:10 a=MSl-tDqOz04A:10 a=OPBmh+XkhLl+Enan7BmTLg==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Originating-IP: 67.242.120.143 Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/cpupri: Remove cpupri->pri_active From: Steven Rostedt To: Yong Zhang Cc: LKML , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Peter Zijlstra , Mike Galbraith , "Luis Claudio R." =?UTF-8?Q?Gon=EF=BF=BDalves?= , Matthew Hank Sabins , Gregory Haskins , Andrew Morton In-Reply-To: <20110805143822.GA3199@zhy> References: <1312317372.18583.101.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <20110805082008.GA6628@zhy> <1312547447.18583.195.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <20110805143822.GA3199@zhy> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2011 11:26:40 -0400 Message-ID: <1312558000.18583.201.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2011-08-05 at 22:38 +0800, Yong Zhang wrote: > Signed-off-by: Yong Zhang > --- > 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 > > #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