rcu: Remove some superfluous lines
PATCH 1/1 rcu: Remove some superfluous lines
I think you'll find this condition is superfluous, as the whole function is under #ifdef of that same.
--- kernel/rcu/tree.c | 3 --- 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
kernel/rcu/tree.c +0 -3
@@ -4237,9 +4237,6 @@ static void rcu_cleanup_dying_idle_cpu(int cpu, struct rcu_state *rsp)struct rcu_data *rdp =per_cpu_ptr (rsp->rda, cpu);struct rcu_node *rnp = rdp->mynode;/* Outgoing CPU's rdp & rnp. */ -if (!IS_ENABLED (CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU )) -return ; -/* Remove outgoing CPU from mask in the leaf rcu_node structure. */ mask = rdp->grpmask;raw_spin_lock_irqsave_rcu_node (rnp, flags);/* Enforce GP memory-order guarantee. */
Quoted 5 lines · Peter Zijlstra
I think you'll find this condition is superfluous, as the whole function is under #ifdef of that same.
Signed-off-by Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <[email protected]>
Right you are! It got moved under that #ifdef in the process of merging the RCU, hotplug, and swait changes, and I failed to notice. Good catch!
I will apply this to my tree once -rc1 comes out, as it will apply to -rcu at that point.
Or maybe we should remove the #ifdef and add IS_ENABLED() to the other functions under that #ifdef. Thoughts?
Thanx, Paul
Quoted 19 lines
--- kernel/rcu/tree.c | 3 --- 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)kernel/rcu/tree.c +0
-3@@ -4237,9 +4237,6 @@ static void rcu_cleanup_dying_idle_cpu(int cpu, struct rcu_state *rsp)struct rcu_data *rdp =per_cpu_ptr (rsp->rda, cpu);struct rcu_node *rnp = rdp->mynode;/* Outgoing CPU's rdp & rnp. */ -if (!IS_ENABLED (CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU )) -return ; -/* Remove outgoing CPU from mask in the leaf rcu_node structure. */ mask = rdp->grpmask;raw_spin_lock_irqsave_rcu_node (rnp, flags);/* Enforce GP memory-order guarantee. */
Quoted 7 lines · Paul E. McKenney
Quoted 5 lines · Peter Zijlstra
I think you'll find this condition is superfluous, as the whole function is under #ifdef of that same.
Signed-off-by Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <[email protected]>
Quoted 8 lines
Right you are! It got moved under that #ifdef in the process of merging the RCU, hotplug, and swait changes, and I failed to notice. Good catch!
I will apply this to my tree once -rc1 comes out, as it will apply to -rcu at that point.
Or maybe we should remove the #ifdef and add
IS_ENABLED()to the other functions under that #ifdef. Thoughts?
I'd go with the #ifdef, its the conventional pattern.
Quoted 11 lines · Peter Zijlstra
Quoted 10 lines · Paul E. McKenney
Quoted 5 lines · Peter Zijlstra
I think you'll find this condition is superfluous, as the whole function is under #ifdef of that same.
Signed-off-by Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <[email protected]>Right you are! It got moved under that #ifdef in the process of merging the RCU, hotplug, and swait changes, and I failed to notice. Good catch!
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 5 lines
I will apply this to my tree once -rc1 comes out, as it will apply to -rcu at that point.
Or maybe we should remove the #ifdef and add
IS_ENABLED()to the other functions under that #ifdef. Thoughts?I'd go with the #ifdef, its the conventional pattern.
Longer term, I am moving from #ifdef to IS_ENABLED(), as it makes for easier detection of compiler errors in oddball combinations of Kconfig options. But no point in carrying redundant code in the meantime, so queued for 4.8.
Thanx, Paul