[RFC][PATCH 08/11] sched: Simplify preempt_count tests

[Peter Zijlstra]

Since we stopped setting PREEMPT_ACTIVE, there is no need to mask it
out of preempt_count() tests.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
 include/linux/preempt.h |    3 +--
 kernel/sched/core.c     |    2 +-
 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

--- a/include/linux/preempt.h
+++ b/include/linux/preempt.h
@@ -126,8 +126,7 @@
  * Check whether we were atomic before we did preempt_disable():
  * (used by the scheduler)
  */
-#define in_atomic_preempt_off() \
-		((preempt_count() & ~PREEMPT_ACTIVE) != PREEMPT_DISABLE_OFFSET)
+#define in_atomic_preempt_off() (preempt_count() != PREEMPT_DISABLE_OFFSET)
 
 #if defined(CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT) || defined(CONFIG_PREEMPT_TRACER)
 extern void preempt_count_add(int val);
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -7472,7 +7472,7 @@ void __init sched_init(void)
 #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP
 static inline int preempt_count_equals(int preempt_offset)
 {
-	int nested = (preempt_count() & ~PREEMPT_ACTIVE) + rcu_preempt_depth();
+	int nested = preempt_count() + rcu_preempt_depth();
 
 	return (nested == preempt_offset);
 }


--
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/