From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756392AbcHZDTc (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Aug 2016 23:19:32 -0400 Received: from LGEAMRELO13.lge.com ([156.147.23.53]:35340 "EHLO lgeamrelo13.lge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755789AbcHZDT3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Aug 2016 23:19:29 -0400 X-Original-SENDERIP: 156.147.1.151 X-Original-MAILFROM: byungchul.park@lge.com X-Original-SENDERIP: 10.177.222.33 X-Original-MAILFROM: byungchul.park@lge.com Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 12:00:19 +0900 From: Byungchul Park To: mingo@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] sched: apply ifdef CONFIG_SMP to meaningful code only on SMP system Message-ID: <20160826030018.GA2279@X58A-UD3R> References: <1436089411-27244-1-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com> <20160825065658.GZ2279@X58A-UD3R> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160825065658.GZ2279@X58A-UD3R> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 03:56:59PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > On Sun, Jul 05, 2015 at 06:43:31PM +0900, byungchul.park@lge.com wrote: > > From: Byungchul Park > > Hello, > > This patch was rejected and the next version having tried to apply what > peterz recommanded, was almost ignored last year. But now, exactly same > thing is already in the tree which was posted by Tim Chen. Yes. This is > a trivial one, I thus don't mind much. Commiting patches is not important. I meant that "Whether my patches are commited or not is not important". > However, I want to ask you to treat patches by new one like me with more > consideration, please. Sometimes I feel thankful while sometimes I feel > disappointed with a happening like this. It would be appriciated if you > do so. > > Thank you, > Byungchul > > > > > account_numa_dequeue and manipulating se->group_node are meaningful only on SMP > > > > Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park > > --- > > kernel/sched/fair.c | 4 +++- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c > > index 09456fc..93b8de6 100644 > > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c > > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c > > @@ -2337,15 +2337,17 @@ account_entity_dequeue(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se) > > update_load_sub(&cfs_rq->load, se->load.weight); > > if (!parent_entity(se)) > > update_load_sub(&rq_of(cfs_rq)->load, se->load.weight); > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP > > if (entity_is_task(se)) { > > account_numa_dequeue(rq_of(cfs_rq), task_of(se)); > > list_del_init(&se->group_node); > > } > > +#endif > > cfs_rq->nr_running--; > > } > > > > #ifdef CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED > > -# ifdef CONFIG_SMP > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP > > static inline long calc_tg_weight(struct task_group *tg, struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq) > > { > > long tg_weight; > > -- > > 1.7.9.5 > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/