cpuidle: Drop misleading comments about RCU usage
The commit1098582a0f
("sched,idle,rcu: Push rcu_idle deeper into the idle path"), moved the calls rcu_idle_enter|exit() into the cpuidle core. However, it forgot to remove a couple of comments in enter_s2idle_proper() about why RCU_NONIDLE earlier was needed. So, let's drop them as they have become a bit misleading. Fixes:1098582a0f
("sched,idle,rcu: Push rcu_idle deeper into the idle path") Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
36050d8984
commit
bd80527457
|
@ -142,11 +142,6 @@ static void enter_s2idle_proper(struct cpuidle_driver *drv,
|
|||
|
||||
time_start = ns_to_ktime(local_clock());
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* trace_suspend_resume() called by tick_freeze() for the last CPU
|
||||
* executing it contains RCU usage regarded as invalid in the idle
|
||||
* context, so tell RCU about that.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
tick_freeze();
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* The state used here cannot be a "coupled" one, because the "coupled"
|
||||
|
@ -159,11 +154,6 @@ static void enter_s2idle_proper(struct cpuidle_driver *drv,
|
|||
target_state->enter_s2idle(dev, drv, index);
|
||||
if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!irqs_disabled()))
|
||||
local_irq_disable();
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* timekeeping_resume() that will be called by tick_unfreeze() for the
|
||||
* first CPU executing it calls functions containing RCU read-side
|
||||
* critical sections, so tell RCU about that.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
if (!(target_state->flags & CPUIDLE_FLAG_RCU_IDLE))
|
||||
rcu_idle_exit();
|
||||
tick_unfreeze();
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue