Re: BFS 420: cleanup in tick handling

[Martin <marogge@onlinehome.de>]

On 05/19/2012 09:30 AM, Hillf Danton wrote:
> The cpu on stack is not needed, so remove it.
>
> --- a/kernel/sched/bfs.c	Mon May 14 20:50:38 2012
> +++ b/kernel/sched/bfs.c	Sat May 19 15:18:24 2012
> @@ -2822,8 +2822,7 @@ void wake_up_idle_cpu(int cpu);
>    */
>   void scheduler_tick(void)
>   {
> -	int cpu __maybe_unused = smp_processor_id();
> -	struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
> +	struct rq *rq = this_rq();
>
>   	sched_clock_tick();
>   	/* grq lock not grabbed, so only update rq clock */
> --
> --
> 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/

Hillf, I noticed you posting a few patches to BFS recently. Just wanted 
to make you aware that there is a certain erm communication issue 
between the kernel maintainers and the author of BFS. Since he is busy 
in real life you should contact him directly or cc him. See tail -1 
Documentation/scheduler/sched-BFS.txt for email.