rcu: Consolidate PREEMPT and !PREEMPT synchronize_rcu()
Now that rcu_blocking_is_gp() makes the correct immediate-return decision for both PREEMPT and !PREEMPT, a single implementation of synchronize_rcu() will work correctly under both configurations. This commit therefore eliminates a few lines of code by consolidating the two implementations of synchronize_rcu(). Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>
This commit is contained in:
@@ -643,33 +643,6 @@ static void _synchronize_rcu_expedited(void)
|
||||
mutex_unlock(&rcu_state.exp_mutex);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* During early boot, any blocking grace-period wait automatically
|
||||
* implies a grace period. Later on, this is never the case for PREEMPT.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* Howevr, because a context switch is a grace period for !PREEMPT, any
|
||||
* blocking grace-period wait automatically implies a grace period if
|
||||
* there is only one CPU online at any point time during execution of
|
||||
* either synchronize_rcu() or synchronize_rcu_expedited(). It is OK to
|
||||
* occasionally incorrectly indicate that there are multiple CPUs online
|
||||
* when there was in fact only one the whole time, as this just adds some
|
||||
* overhead: RCU still operates correctly.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
static int rcu_blocking_is_gp(void)
|
||||
{
|
||||
int ret;
|
||||
|
||||
if (rcu_scheduler_active == RCU_SCHEDULER_INACTIVE)
|
||||
return true;
|
||||
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT))
|
||||
return false;
|
||||
might_sleep(); /* Check for RCU read-side critical section. */
|
||||
preempt_disable();
|
||||
ret = num_online_cpus() <= 1;
|
||||
preempt_enable();
|
||||
return ret;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
|
Reference in New Issue
Block a user