leandrof/linux
1
0
Fork 0
forked from Minki/linux
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

[PATCH] rcu: don't set ->next_pending in rcu_start_batch()

Browse Source 
I think it is better to set ->next_pending in the caller, when
it is needed. This saves one parameter, and this coincides with
cpu_quiet() beahaviour, which sets ->completed = ->cur itself.

Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@us.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
This commit is contained in:
Oleg Nesterov 2006-01-08 22:19:33 +03:00 committed by Linus Torvalds
parent 1fd5a46dd6
commit dbc1651f0c
1 changed files with 4 additions and 7 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

11
kernel/rcupdate.c
View File

@ -236,12 +236,8 @@ static void rcu_do_batch(struct rcu_data *rdp)
* active batch and the batch to be registered has not already occurred.
* Caller must hold rcu_state.lock.
*/
static void rcu_start_batch(struct rcu_ctrlblk *rcp, struct rcu_state *rsp,
int next_pending)
static void rcu_start_batch(struct rcu_ctrlblk *rcp, struct rcu_state *rsp)
{
if (next_pending)
rcp->next_pending = 1;
if (rcp->next_pending &&
rcp->completed == rcp->cur) {
rcp->next_pending = 0;
@ -275,7 +271,7 @@ static void cpu_quiet(int cpu, struct rcu_ctrlblk *rcp, struct rcu_state *rsp)
if (cpus_empty(rsp->cpumask)) {
/* batch completed ! */
rcp->completed = rcp->cur;
rcu_start_batch(rcp, rsp, 0);
rcu_start_batch(rcp, rsp);
}
}
@ -410,7 +406,8 @@ static void __rcu_process_callbacks(struct rcu_ctrlblk *rcp,
if (!rcp->next_pending) {
/* and start it/schedule start if it's a new batch */
spin_lock(&rsp->lock);
rcu_start_batch(rcp, rsp, 1);
rcp->next_pending = 1;
rcu_start_batch(rcp, rsp);
spin_unlock(&rsp->lock);
}
} else {