On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 05:46:47PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 11:07:39AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > @@ -224,17 +243,15 @@ static int event_function(void *info)
> > int ret = 0;
> >
> > lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled();
> > + guard(perf_ctx_lock)(cpuctx, task_ctx);
> >
> > - perf_ctx_lock(cpuctx, task_ctx);
> > /*
> > * Since we do the IPI call without holding ctx->lock things can have
> > * changed, double check we hit the task we set out to hit.
> > */
> > if (ctx->task) {
> > - if (ctx->task != current) {
> > - ret = -ESRCH;
> > - goto unlock;
> > - }
> > + if (ctx->task != current)
> > + return -ESRCH;
> >
> > /*
> > * We only use event_function_call() on established contexts,
> > @@ -254,8 +271,6 @@ static int event_function(void *info)
> > }
> >
> > efs->func(event, cpuctx, ctx, efs->data);
> > -unlock:
> > - perf_ctx_unlock(cpuctx, task_ctx);
> >
> > return ret;
>
>
> We can change this to a return 0; and get rid of the "ret" variable.
This and the previous one, done!
