[PATCH V2] sched/cpupri: Remove cpupri->pri_active

[Yong Zhang]

On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 11:26:40AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> 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.

Updated.

Thanks,
Yong

---
From: Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [PATCH V2] sched/cpupri: Remove cpupri->pri_active

Since [sched/cpupri: Remove the vec->lock], member pri_active
of struct cpupri is not needed any more, just remove it. Also
clean stuff related to it.

Signed-off-by: Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@xxxxxxxxx>
---
 kernel/sched_cpupri.c |    3 +--
 kernel/sched_cpupri.h |    2 --
 2 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched_cpupri.c b/kernel/sched_cpupri.c
index 90faffd..a86cf9d 100644
--- a/kernel/sched_cpupri.c
+++ b/kernel/sched_cpupri.c
@@ -152,8 +152,7 @@ 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.
+	 * cpu being missed by the priority loop in cpupri_find.
 	 */
 	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];
 };
 
-- 
1.7.1

--
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/