From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1755018AbdKNLkJ (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Tue, 14 Nov 2017 06:40:09 -0500
Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([146.0.238.70]:36911 "EHLO
        Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1753437AbdKNLkE (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 14 Nov 2017 06:40:04 -0500
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2017 12:39:59 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com>
cc: mingo@kernel.org, fweisbec@gmail.com,
        Srinivas REDDY Eeda <srinivas.eeda@oracle.com>,
        Joe Jin <joe.jin@oracle.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tick/broadcast: Remove redundant code in
 tick_check_new_device()
In-Reply-To: <374b90a7-1a7a-5775-73d5-e204bfc69a65@oracle.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1711141231360.2044@nanos>
References: <35b094f6-70e0-49f2-803a-3333d7ee2524@default> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1711131738140.1851@nanos> <374b90a7-1a7a-5775-73d5-e204bfc69a65@oracle.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, 14 Nov 2017, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> On 2017/11/14 0:54, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 8 Nov 2017, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> > 
> > > There is no way a timer used as broadcast clockevent device is also used
> > > as
> > > percpu tick clockevent device currently.
> > Correct.
> > 
> > > It's better to put related code in tick_install_broadcast_device(), but I
> > > feel
> > > it's harmless to give it back to the clockevents layer. Pls correct me if
> > > I'm
> > > wrong.
> > You already established, that it _cannot_ be the broadcast device and the
> > per cpu device at the same time. So that condition can never be true. What
> > do you want to put into tick_install_broadcast_device()? This second
> > paragraph doesn't make sense, unless I'm missing something.
> 
> I didn't find the reason in long history logs while the comments saying 'If
> the current device is the broadcast device, do not give it back to the
> clockevents layer !'

To be honest I can't figure it out myself why this was put there, even if I
wrote it myself. Fact is that this is wrong and cannot happen at all.

Thanks,

	tglx