Re: [PATCH 16/16] hrtimer: use base->hres_active directly instead of hrtimer_hres_active()

[Viresh Kumar]

On 28 March 2014 17:11, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> @@ -1107,7 +1107,7 @@ ktime_t hrtimer_get_next_event(void)
>
>         raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&cpu_base->lock, flags);
>
> -       if (!hrtimer_hres_active()) {
> +       if (!cpu_base->hres_active) {
>                 for (i = 0; i < HRTIMER_MAX_CLOCK_BASES; i++, base++) {
>                         struct hrtimer *timer;
>                         struct timerqueue_node *next;
> @@ -1437,7 +1437,7 @@ void hrtimer_run_queues(void)
>         struct hrtimer_clock_base *base;
>         int index, gettime = 1;
>
> -       if (hrtimer_hres_active())
> +       if (cpu_base->hres_active)
>                 return;
>
>         for (index = 0; index < HRTIMER_MAX_CLOCK_BASES; index++) {

These two changes are broken.. Would remove these and resend..
My tree is fixed though..
--
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/