On 2019-08-21 08:53:29 [-0700], Tejun Heo wrote: > On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 01:18:14PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > I was looking at the lifetime of the the ->css_rstat_flush() to see if > > cgroup_rstat_cpu_lock should remain a raw_spinlock_t. I didn't find any > > users and is unused since it was introduced in commit > > 8f53470bab042 ("cgroup: Add cgroup_subsys->css_rstat_flush()") > > > > Remove the css_rstat_flush callback because it has no users. > > > > Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Yeah, I'd rather keep it. The patch which used this didn't get merged > but the use case is valid and it will likely be used for different > cases. I was afraid that the inner while loop in cgroup_rstat_flush_locked() could get too long with the css_rstat_flush() here. Especially if it acquires spin locks. But since this is not currently happening... Any objections to the remaining series if I drop this patch? > Thanks. > Sebastian