On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 04:17:03PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-08-30 at 11:18 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > From: "Paul E. McKenney" <[email protected]>
> >
> > Moving the RCU grace-period processing to a kthread and adjusting the
> > tracing resulted in two of the rcu_state structure's fields being unused.
> > This commit therefore removes them.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > kernel/rcutree.h | 7 -------
> > 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.h b/kernel/rcutree.h
> > index 2d4cc18..8f0293c 100644
> > --- a/kernel/rcutree.h
> > +++ b/kernel/rcutree.h
> > @@ -378,13 +378,6 @@ struct rcu_state {
> >
> > u8 fqs_state ____cacheline_internodealigned_in_smp;
> > /* Force QS state. */
> > - u8 fqs_active; /* force_quiescent_state() */
> > - /* is running. */
> > - u8 fqs_need_gp; /* A CPU was prevented from */
> > - /* starting a new grace */
> > - /* period because */
> > - /* force_quiescent_state() */
> > - /* was running. */
> > u8 boost; /* Subject to priority boost. */
> > unsigned long gpnum; /* Current gp number. */
> > unsigned long completed; /* # of last completed gp. */
>
> Typically one would fold this change into the patch that caused said
> redundancy and not mention it. Save a patch to (post/review/merge) and
> makes the patches a more solid whole.
Fair enough. I still like the idea of pulling the stuff creating
rcu_gp_kthread() into one patch, though.
Thanx, Paul
--
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/
