Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | From | "Paul E. McKenney" <> | Subject | [PATCH tip/core/rcu 02/10] rcu: Merge rcu_dynticks structure into rcu_data structure | Date | Wed, 29 Aug 2018 16:07:27 -0700 |
| |
Now that there is only ever one rcu_data structure per CPU, there is no need for a separate rcu_dynticks structure. This commit therefore adds the rcu_dynticks fields into the rcu_data structure in preparation for removing the rcu_dynticks structure entirely. Note that the ->dynticks field will be handled specially because there is a field by that name in both structures.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> --- kernel/rcu/tree.h | 17 +++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.h b/kernel/rcu/tree.h index 5e561f1339d4..d35cd9677b08 100644 --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.h +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.h @@ -212,6 +212,23 @@ struct rcu_data { /* 3) dynticks interface. */ struct rcu_dynticks *dynticks; /* Shared per-CPU dynticks state. */ int dynticks_snap; /* Per-GP tracking for dynticks. */ + long dynticks_nesting; /* Track process nesting level. */ + long dynticks_nmi_nesting; /* Track irq/NMI nesting level. */ + // atomic_t dynticks; /* Even value for idle, else odd. */ + bool rcu_need_heavy_qs; /* GP old, need heavy quiescent state. */ + bool rcu_urgent_qs; /* GP old need light quiescent state. */ +#ifdef CONFIG_RCU_FAST_NO_HZ + bool all_lazy; /* Are all CPU's CBs lazy? */ + unsigned long nonlazy_posted; + /* # times non-lazy CBs posted to CPU. */ + unsigned long nonlazy_posted_snap; + /* idle-period nonlazy_posted snapshot. */ + unsigned long last_accelerate; + /* Last jiffy CBs were accelerated. */ + unsigned long last_advance_all; + /* Last jiffy CBs were all advanced. */ + int tick_nohz_enabled_snap; /* Previously seen value from sysfs. */ +#endif /* #ifdef CONFIG_RCU_FAST_NO_HZ */ /* 4) reasons this CPU needed to be kicked by force_quiescent_state */ unsigned long dynticks_fqs; /* Kicked due to dynticks idle. */ -- 2.17.1
| |