On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 02:18:27PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> Passes light testing, but I am confused about why the change to
> resched_task() when only resched_cpu() is invoked elsewhere in the patch.
> Enlightenment?
> > > -#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> > > void resched_task(struct task_struct *p)
> > > {
> > > int cpu;
> > >
> > > - assert_raw_spin_locked(&task_rq(p)->lock);
> > > + lockdep_assert_held(&task_rq(p)->lock);
> > >
> > > if (test_tsk_need_resched(p))
> > > return;
That one? Fly by fixup I suppose.. the lockdep check is cheaper as it
compiles away for !lockdep kernels, also its more correct.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
