Thread (26 messages) 26 messages, 5 authors, 2015-05-18

Re: [PATCH RT 3.18] irq_work: Provide a soft-irq based queue

From: Mike Galbraith <hidden>
Date: 2015-04-23 07:01:27
Also in: lkml

On Thu, 2015-04-23 at 08:50 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2015-04-23 08:11, Mike Galbraith wrote:
quoted
@@ -103,6 +98,9 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(irq_work_queue_on);
 /* Enqueue the irq work @work on the current CPU */
 bool irq_work_queue(struct irq_work *work)
 {
+       bool realtime = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL);
+       bool raise = false;
+
        /* Only queue if not already pending */
        if (!irq_work_claim(work))
                return false;
@@ -110,25 +108,22 @@ bool irq_work_queue(struct irq_work *wor
        /* Queue the entry and raise the IPI if needed. */
        preempt_disable();
 
-#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL
-       if (work->flags & IRQ_WORK_HARD_IRQ) {
+       if (realtime && (work->flags & IRQ_WORK_HARD_IRQ)) {
                if (llist_add(&work->llnode, 
this_cpu_ptr(&hirq_work_list)))
This boils down to

#ifdef CONFIG_X
some_type x;
#endif
...

if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X) && ...)
      use(x);

And here we even have an indirection for IS_ENABLED via that local 
bool
variable. Is that pattern OK for Linux? Does it compile in all 
supported
optimization levels of all supported compilers?
I hope it all goes away, that being what IS_ENABLED() is there for.

        -Mike
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help