From 933393f58fef9963eac61db8093689544e29a600 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Christoph Lameter Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 11:58:51 -0600 Subject: percpu: Remove irqsafe_cpu_xxx variants We simply say that regular this_cpu use must be safe regardless of preemption and interrupt state. That has no material change for x86 and s390 implementations of this_cpu operations. However, arches that do not provide their own implementation for this_cpu operations will now get code generated that disables interrupts instead of preemption. -tj: This is part of on-going percpu API cleanup. For detailed discussion of the subject, please refer to the following thread. http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1222078 Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo LKML-Reference: --- mm/slub.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) (limited to 'mm') diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c index ed3334d9b6da..0011489c28ac 100644 --- a/mm/slub.c +++ b/mm/slub.c @@ -1978,7 +1978,7 @@ int put_cpu_partial(struct kmem_cache *s, struct page *page, int drain) page->pobjects = pobjects; page->next = oldpage; - } while (irqsafe_cpu_cmpxchg(s->cpu_slab->partial, oldpage, page) != oldpage); + } while (this_cpu_cmpxchg(s->cpu_slab->partial, oldpage, page) != oldpage); stat(s, CPU_PARTIAL_FREE); return pobjects; } @@ -2304,7 +2304,7 @@ redo: * Since this is without lock semantics the protection is only against * code executing on this cpu *not* from access by other cpus. */ - if (unlikely(!irqsafe_cpu_cmpxchg_double( + if (unlikely(!this_cpu_cmpxchg_double( s->cpu_slab->freelist, s->cpu_slab->tid, object, tid, get_freepointer_safe(s, object), next_tid(tid)))) { @@ -2534,7 +2534,7 @@ redo: if (likely(page == c->page)) { set_freepointer(s, object, c->freelist); - if (unlikely(!irqsafe_cpu_cmpxchg_double( + if (unlikely(!this_cpu_cmpxchg_double( s->cpu_slab->freelist, s->cpu_slab->tid, c->freelist, tid, object, next_tid(tid)))) { -- cgit v1.2.3