Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | From | Namhyung Kim <> | Subject | [PATCH 1/2] watchdog: Use local_clock for get_timestamp() | Date | Thu, 27 Dec 2012 11:49:44 +0900 |
| |
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@lge.com>
The get_timestamp() function is always called with current cpu, thus using local_clock() would be more appropriate and it makes the code shorter and cleaner IMHO.
Cc: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org> --- kernel/watchdog.c | 10 ++++------ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/watchdog.c b/kernel/watchdog.c index 75a2ab3d0b02..082ca6878a3f 100644 --- a/kernel/watchdog.c +++ b/kernel/watchdog.c @@ -112,9 +112,9 @@ static int get_softlockup_thresh(void) * resolution, and we don't need to waste time with a big divide when * 2^30ns == 1.074s. */ -static unsigned long get_timestamp(int this_cpu) +static unsigned long get_timestamp(void) { - return cpu_clock(this_cpu) >> 30LL; /* 2^30 ~= 10^9 */ + return local_clock() >> 30LL; /* 2^30 ~= 10^9 */ } static void set_sample_period(void) @@ -132,9 +132,7 @@ static void set_sample_period(void) /* Commands for resetting the watchdog */ static void __touch_watchdog(void) { - int this_cpu = smp_processor_id(); - - __this_cpu_write(watchdog_touch_ts, get_timestamp(this_cpu)); + __this_cpu_write(watchdog_touch_ts, get_timestamp()); } void touch_softlockup_watchdog(void) @@ -195,7 +193,7 @@ static int is_hardlockup(void) static int is_softlockup(unsigned long touch_ts) { - unsigned long now = get_timestamp(smp_processor_id()); + unsigned long now = get_timestamp(); /* Warn about unreasonable delays: */ if (time_after(now, touch_ts + get_softlockup_thresh())) -- 1.7.11.7
| |