mirror of
https://github.com/FEX-Emu/linux.git
synced 2024-12-19 15:39:07 +00:00
sched: print_rq(): Don't use tasklist_lock
read_lock_irqsave(tasklist_lock) in print_rq() looks strange. We do not need to disable irqs, and they are already disabled by the caller. And afaics this lock buys nothing, we can rely on rcu_read_lock(). In this case it makes sense to also move rcu_read_lock/unlock from the caller to print_rq(). Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Kirill Tkhai <tkhai@yandex.ru> Cc: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20140921193341.GA28628@redhat.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
3472eaa1f1
commit
5bd96ab6fe
@ -150,7 +150,6 @@ print_task(struct seq_file *m, struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
|
||||
static void print_rq(struct seq_file *m, struct rq *rq, int rq_cpu)
|
||||
{
|
||||
struct task_struct *g, *p;
|
||||
unsigned long flags;
|
||||
|
||||
SEQ_printf(m,
|
||||
"\nrunnable tasks:\n"
|
||||
@ -159,14 +158,14 @@ static void print_rq(struct seq_file *m, struct rq *rq, int rq_cpu)
|
||||
"------------------------------------------------------"
|
||||
"----------------------------------------------------\n");
|
||||
|
||||
read_lock_irqsave(&tasklist_lock, flags);
|
||||
rcu_read_lock();
|
||||
for_each_process_thread(g, p) {
|
||||
if (task_cpu(p) != rq_cpu)
|
||||
continue;
|
||||
|
||||
print_task(m, rq, p);
|
||||
}
|
||||
read_unlock_irqrestore(&tasklist_lock, flags);
|
||||
rcu_read_unlock();
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
void print_cfs_rq(struct seq_file *m, int cpu, struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
|
||||
@ -331,9 +330,7 @@ do { \
|
||||
print_cfs_stats(m, cpu);
|
||||
print_rt_stats(m, cpu);
|
||||
|
||||
rcu_read_lock();
|
||||
print_rq(m, rq, cpu);
|
||||
rcu_read_unlock();
|
||||
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sched_debug_lock, flags);
|
||||
SEQ_printf(m, "\n");
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user