Re: [PATCH] sched: remove useless code in yield_to

[Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>]

On Fri, 2012-08-10 at 11:10 +0800, Michael Wang wrote: 
> On 08/10/2012 11:05 AM, Michael Wang wrote:
> > On 07/03/2012 02:34 PM, Michael Wang wrote:
> >> From: Michael Wang <wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >>
> >> it's impossible to enter else branch if we have set skip_clock_update
> >> in task_yield_fair(), as yield_to_task_fair() will directly return
> >> true after invoke task_yield_fair().
> > 
> > Could I get some conclusion on this patch? Should we clean up that peace
> > of code or leave it there?
> s /peace/piece and cc mike...

If some other class grows yield_to_task (ick), it'll have to be looked
at again, but hopefully for all eternity that branch is dead.  Bury it.

> > 
> > Regards,
> > Michael Wang
> > 
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Michael Wang <wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >> ---
> >>  kernel/sched/core.c |    7 -------
> >>  1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> >> index 9bb7d28..77c14aa 100644
> >> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> >> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> >> @@ -4737,13 +4737,6 @@ again:
> >>  		 */
> >>  		if (preempt && rq != p_rq)
> >>  			resched_task(p_rq->curr);
> >> -	} else {
> >> -		/*
> >> -		 * We might have set it in task_yield_fair(), but are
> >> -		 * not going to schedule(), so don't want to skip
> >> -		 * the next update.
> >> -		 */
> >> -		rq->skip_clock_update = 0;
> >>  	}
> >>
> >>  out:
> >>
> > 
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> > 
>