On 08/13, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> Peter, could you take these simple patches ?
>
> Better later than never... per-file, but please feel free to join
> them in a single patch.
>
> read_lock_irq*(tasklist_lock) in kernel/sched/ files looks strange.
> Why? I'll recheck, but this looks unneeded.
Yes, please consider these minor cleanups on top of for_each_thread
conversions.
read_lock_irq(tasklist) in normalize_rt_tasks() doesn't really hurt,
but it looks confusing. If we really have a reason to disable irqs
this (subtle) reason should be documented.
And I can't understand tg_has_rt_tasks(). Don't we need something
like the patch below? If not, please do not ask me why I think so,
I don't understand this black magic ;) But the usage of the global
"runqueues" array looks suspicious.
Oleg.
--- x/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ x/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -7354,7 +7354,7 @@ static inline int tg_has_rt_tasks(struct
struct task_struct *g, *p;
for_each_process_thread(g, p) {
- if (rt_task(p) && task_rq(p)->rt.tg == tg)
+ if (rt_task(p) && task_group(p) == tg)
return 1;
}
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
