forked from luck/tmp_suning_uos_patched
rcu: Remove unused rcu_kick_nohz_cpu() function
The rcu_kick_nohz_cpu() function is no longer used, and the functionality it used to provide is now provided by a call to resched_cpu() in the force-quiescent-state function rcu_implicit_dynticks_qs(). This commit therefore removes rcu_kick_nohz_cpu(). Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
c7037ff524
commit
164ba3fc48
|
@ -483,7 +483,6 @@ static void __init rcu_spawn_nocb_kthreads(void);
|
|||
#ifdef CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU
|
||||
static void __init rcu_organize_nocb_kthreads(struct rcu_state *rsp);
|
||||
#endif /* #ifdef CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU */
|
||||
static void __maybe_unused rcu_kick_nohz_cpu(int cpu);
|
||||
static bool init_nocb_callback_list(struct rcu_data *rdp);
|
||||
static void rcu_bind_gp_kthread(void);
|
||||
static bool rcu_nohz_full_cpu(struct rcu_state *rsp);
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -2645,23 +2645,6 @@ static bool init_nocb_callback_list(struct rcu_data *rdp)
|
|||
|
||||
#endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU */
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* An adaptive-ticks CPU can potentially execute in kernel mode for an
|
||||
* arbitrarily long period of time with the scheduling-clock tick turned
|
||||
* off. RCU will be paying attention to this CPU because it is in the
|
||||
* kernel, but the CPU cannot be guaranteed to be executing the RCU state
|
||||
* machine because the scheduling-clock tick has been disabled. Therefore,
|
||||
* if an adaptive-ticks CPU is failing to respond to the current grace
|
||||
* period and has not be idle from an RCU perspective, kick it.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
static void __maybe_unused rcu_kick_nohz_cpu(int cpu)
|
||||
{
|
||||
#ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL
|
||||
if (tick_nohz_full_cpu(cpu))
|
||||
smp_send_reschedule(cpu);
|
||||
#endif /* #ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL */
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Is this CPU a NO_HZ_FULL CPU that should ignore RCU so that the
|
||||
* grace-period kthread will do force_quiescent_state() processing?
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user