"this_rq" is normally used to denote the RQ on the current cpu
(i.e. "cpu_rq(this_cpu)").  So clean up the usage of this_rq to be
more consistent with the rest of the code.

Signed-off-by: Gregory Haskins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---

 kernel/sched_rt.c |   46 +++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
 1 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched_rt.c b/kernel/sched_rt.c
index 9b06d7c..0348423 100644
--- a/kernel/sched_rt.c
+++ b/kernel/sched_rt.c
@@ -307,7 +307,7 @@ static struct task_struct *pick_next_highest_task_rt(struct 
rq *rq,
 
 /* Will lock the rq it finds */
 static struct rq *find_lock_lowest_rq(struct task_struct *task,
-                                     struct rq *this_rq)
+                                     struct rq *rq)
 {
        struct rq *lowest_rq = NULL;
        cpumask_t cpu_mask;
@@ -321,21 +321,21 @@ static struct rq *find_lock_lowest_rq(struct task_struct 
*task,
                 * Scan each rq for the lowest prio.
                 */
                for_each_cpu_mask(cpu, cpu_mask) {
-                       struct rq *rq = &per_cpu(runqueues, cpu);
+                       struct rq *curr_rq = &per_cpu(runqueues, cpu);
 
-                       if (cpu == this_rq->cpu)
+                       if (cpu == rq->cpu)
                                continue;
 
                        /* We look for lowest RT prio or non-rt CPU */
-                       if (rq->rt.highest_prio >= MAX_RT_PRIO) {
-                               lowest_rq = rq;
+                       if (curr_rq->rt.highest_prio >= MAX_RT_PRIO) {
+                               lowest_rq = curr_rq;
                                break;
                        }
 
                        /* no locking for now */
-                       if (rq->rt.highest_prio > task->prio &&
-                           (!lowest_rq || rq->rt.highest_prio > 
lowest_rq->rt.highest_prio)) {
-                               lowest_rq = rq;
+                       if (curr_rq->rt.highest_prio > task->prio &&
+                           (!lowest_rq || curr_rq->rt.highest_prio > 
lowest_rq->rt.highest_prio)) {
+                               lowest_rq = curr_rq;
                        }
                }
 
@@ -343,16 +343,16 @@ static struct rq *find_lock_lowest_rq(struct task_struct 
*task,
                        break;
 
                /* if the prio of this runqueue changed, try again */
-               if (double_lock_balance(this_rq, lowest_rq)) {
+               if (double_lock_balance(rq, lowest_rq)) {
                        /*
                         * We had to unlock the run queue. In
                         * the mean time, task could have
                         * migrated already or had its affinity changed.
                         * Also make sure that it wasn't scheduled on its rq.
                         */
-                       if (unlikely(task_rq(task) != this_rq ||
+                       if (unlikely(task_rq(task) != rq ||
                                     !cpu_isset(lowest_rq->cpu, 
task->cpus_allowed) ||
-                                    task_running(this_rq, task) ||
+                                    task_running(rq, task) ||
                                     !task->se.on_rq)) {
                                spin_unlock(&lowest_rq->lock);
                                lowest_rq = NULL;
@@ -377,21 +377,21 @@ static struct rq *find_lock_lowest_rq(struct task_struct 
*task,
  * running task can migrate over to a CPU that is running a task
  * of lesser priority.
  */
-static int push_rt_task(struct rq *this_rq)
+static int push_rt_task(struct rq *rq)
 {
        struct task_struct *next_task;
        struct rq *lowest_rq;
        int ret = 0;
        int paranoid = RT_MAX_TRIES;
 
-       assert_spin_locked(&this_rq->lock);
+       assert_spin_locked(&rq->lock);
 
-       next_task = pick_next_highest_task_rt(this_rq, -1);
+       next_task = pick_next_highest_task_rt(rq, -1);
        if (!next_task)
                return 0;
 
  retry:
-       if (unlikely(next_task == this_rq->curr)) {
+       if (unlikely(next_task == rq->curr)) {
                WARN_ON(1);
                return 0;
        }
@@ -401,24 +401,24 @@ static int push_rt_task(struct rq *this_rq)
         * higher priority than current. If that's the case
         * just reschedule current.
         */
-       if (unlikely(next_task->prio < this_rq->curr->prio)) {
-               resched_task(this_rq->curr);
+       if (unlikely(next_task->prio < rq->curr->prio)) {
+               resched_task(rq->curr);
                return 0;
        }
 
-       /* We might release this_rq lock */
+       /* We might release rq lock */
        get_task_struct(next_task);
 
        /* find_lock_lowest_rq locks the rq if found */
-       lowest_rq = find_lock_lowest_rq(next_task, this_rq);
+       lowest_rq = find_lock_lowest_rq(next_task, rq);
        if (!lowest_rq) {
                struct task_struct *task;
                /*
-                * find lock_lowest_rq releases this_rq->lock
+                * find lock_lowest_rq releases rq->lock
                 * so it is possible that next_task has changed.
                 * If it has, then try again.
                 */
-               task = pick_next_highest_task_rt(this_rq, -1);
+               task = pick_next_highest_task_rt(rq, -1);
                if (unlikely(task != next_task) && task && paranoid--) {
                        put_task_struct(next_task);
                        next_task = task;
@@ -429,13 +429,13 @@ static int push_rt_task(struct rq *this_rq)
 
        assert_spin_locked(&lowest_rq->lock);
 
-       deactivate_task(this_rq, next_task, 0);
+       deactivate_task(rq, next_task, 0);
        set_task_cpu(next_task, lowest_rq->cpu);
        activate_task(lowest_rq, next_task, 0);
 
        resched_task(lowest_rq->curr);
 
-       schedstat_inc(this_rq, rto_pushed);
+       schedstat_inc(rq, rto_pushed);
 
        spin_unlock(&lowest_rq->lock);
 

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to