From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 678B2C35247 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 17:00:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E3AA20674 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 17:00:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="S6FGnNcH" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727387AbgBDRAq (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Feb 2020 12:00:46 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([205.139.110.120]:28604 "EHLO us-smtp-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727363AbgBDRAq (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Feb 2020 12:00:46 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1580835645; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=BFdwVowO5Pc/LBG+Jvt+X7iJw2Gji+5wFzeYmAIGpEU=; b=S6FGnNcHwNqhNC7PVm6atCEtANhjzH/5L6LVGd9X1VVXmMFX9XvwZq4jL1OH9Lo+sAzVni 2tltMTfT6YA3VXAEbUG0l6+QQwmqV3c7QLzF09RFqBQRLO0roJcShvS/JQC4weMLEGJOaH RriqO13Nt2hC7+z9gz4YTyI0QbXoWhs= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-196-zrgRukzwM56pnykmTZdjjg-1; Tue, 04 Feb 2020 12:00:43 -0500 X-MC-Unique: zrgRukzwM56pnykmTZdjjg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4510C108838D; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 17:00:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ovpn-116-174.phx2.redhat.com (ovpn-116-174.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.116.174]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A17871001B0B; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 17:00:41 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <590e957e57f2fd83e583450c358e3282e5493709.camel@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/core: sched_tick_remote: Remove duplicate assignment From: Scott Wood To: Phil Auld Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Frederic Weisbecker , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2020 11:00:41 -0600 In-Reply-To: <20200204142718.GA23972@pauld.bos.csb> References: <1580776558-12882-1-git-send-email-swood@redhat.com> <20200204142718.GA23972@pauld.bos.csb> Organization: Red Hat Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.30.5 (3.30.5-1.fc29) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.22 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2020-02-04 at 09:27 -0500, Phil Auld wrote: > Hi Scott, > > On Mon, Feb 03, 2020 at 07:35:58PM -0500 Scott Wood wrote: > > A redundant "curr = rq->curr" was added; remove it. > > > > Fixes: ebc0f83c78a2 ("timers/nohz: Update NOHZ load in remote tick") > > Signed-off-by: Scott Wood > > --- > > kernel/sched/core.c | 1 - > > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c > > index 45f79bcc3146..377ec26e9159 100644 > > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c > > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c > > @@ -3683,7 +3683,6 @@ static void sched_tick_remote(struct work_struct > > *work) > > if (cpu_is_offline(cpu)) > > goto out_unlock; > > > > - curr = rq->curr; > > update_rq_clock(rq); > > > > if (!is_idle_task(curr)) { > > -- > > 1.8.3.1 > > > > Reviewed-by: Phil Auld > > Out of curiosity, why remove this one and not the one right before the > cpu_is_offline check? This was the one that was recently added by mistake. -Scott