[PATCH] x86, perfctr: remove unused func avail_to_resrv_perfctr_nmi()
Naga Chumbalkar
So remove it.
Signed-off-by: Naga Chumbalkar <nagananda....@hp.com>
---
arch/x86/include/asm/nmi.h | 1 -
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perfctr-watchdog.c | 11 -----------
2 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/nmi.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/nmi.h
index 139d4c1..93da9c3 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/nmi.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/nmi.h
@@ -19,7 +19,6 @@ extern void die_nmi(char *str, struct pt_regs *regs, int do_panic);
extern int check_nmi_watchdog(void);
extern int nmi_watchdog_enabled;
extern int avail_to_resrv_perfctr_nmi_bit(unsigned int);
-extern int avail_to_resrv_perfctr_nmi(unsigned int);
extern int reserve_perfctr_nmi(unsigned int);
extern void release_perfctr_nmi(unsigned int);
extern int reserve_evntsel_nmi(unsigned int);
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perfctr-watchdog.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perfctr-watchdog.c
index 898df97..74f4e85 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perfctr-watchdog.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perfctr-watchdog.c
@@ -115,17 +115,6 @@ int avail_to_resrv_perfctr_nmi_bit(unsigned int counter)
return !test_bit(counter, perfctr_nmi_owner);
}
-
-/* checks the an msr for availability */
-int avail_to_resrv_perfctr_nmi(unsigned int msr)
-{
- unsigned int counter;
-
- counter = nmi_perfctr_msr_to_bit(msr);
- BUG_ON(counter > NMI_MAX_COUNTER_BITS);
-
- return !test_bit(counter, perfctr_nmi_owner);
-}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(avail_to_resrv_perfctr_nmi_bit);
int reserve_perfctr_nmi(unsigned int msr)
--
1.6.2.2
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majo...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Cyrill Gorcunov
> avail_to_resrv_perfctr_nmi() is neither EXPORT'd, nor used in the file.
> So remove it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Naga Chumbalkar <nagananda....@hp.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/nmi.h | 1 -
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perfctr-watchdog.c | 11 -----------
> 2 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
Hi Naga, this looks good to me! Thanks.
Is there any plans to use this routine in future
so we shouldn't touch this snippet?
-- Cyrill
Ingo Molnar
* Cyrill Gorcunov <gorc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 01:54:47AM +0000, Naga Chumbalkar wrote:
> > avail_to_resrv_perfctr_nmi() is neither EXPORT'd, nor used in the file.
> > So remove it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Naga Chumbalkar <nagananda....@hp.com>
> > ---
> > arch/x86/include/asm/nmi.h | 1 -
> > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perfctr-watchdog.c | 11 -----------
> > 2 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> >
>
> Hi Naga, this looks good to me! Thanks.
>
> Is there any plans to use this routine in future
> so we shouldn't touch this snippet?
Not that i know of.
In fact we should transform/migrate the NMI watchdog driver by making it based
on a kernel-internal created perf event. (which is what the NMI watchdog
really is: a periodic NMI event occuring once per second and running a
callback function.)
That would give us NMI watchdog support on all future x86 CPUs, automatically
- without having to extend the arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perfctr-watchdog.c code for
it.
Ingo
Cyrill Gorcunov
>
> * Cyrill Gorcunov <gorc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 01:54:47AM +0000, Naga Chumbalkar wrote:
> > > avail_to_resrv_perfctr_nmi() is neither EXPORT'd, nor used in the file.
> > > So remove it.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Naga Chumbalkar <nagananda....@hp.com>
> > > ---
> > > arch/x86/include/asm/nmi.h | 1 -
> > > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perfctr-watchdog.c | 11 -----------
> > > 2 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > >
> >
> > Hi Naga, this looks good to me! Thanks.
> >
> > Is there any plans to use this routine in future
> > so we shouldn't touch this snippet?
>
> Not that i know of.
ok, then we could apply this patch I think, at least for
a while.
>
> In fact we should transform/migrate the NMI watchdog driver by making it based
> on a kernel-internal created perf event. (which is what the NMI watchdog
> really is: a periodic NMI event occuring once per second and running a
> callback function.)
Yes, this would be great. I'll try to find out some time for this
task, though no promises :) If someone get it done earlier I would
really appreciate.
>
> That would give us NMI watchdog support on all future x86 CPUs, automatically
> - without having to extend the arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perfctr-watchdog.c code for
> it.
>
> Ingo
>
-- Cyrill
tip-bot for Naga Chumbalkar
Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/fd2a50a0240f5f5b59070474eabd83a85720a406
Author: Naga Chumbalkar <nagananda....@hp.com>
AuthorDate: Thu, 24 Dec 2009 01:54:47 +0000
Committer: Ingo Molnar <mi...@elte.hu>
CommitDate: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 09:36:46 +0100
x86, perfctr: Remove unused func avail_to_resrv_perfctr_nmi()
avail_to_resrv_perfctr_nmi() is neither EXPORT'd, nor used in
the file. So remove it.
Signed-off-by: Naga Chumbalkar <nagananda....@hp.com>
Acked-by: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorc...@gmail.com>
Cc: oprofi...@lists.sf.net
LKML-Reference: <20091224015441.600...@localhost.localdomain>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mi...@elte.hu>
Ingo Molnar
* Cyrill Gorcunov <gorc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Not that i know of.
>
> ok, then we could apply this patch I think, at least for a while.
yeah, i have applied it.
> > In fact we should transform/migrate the NMI watchdog driver by making it
> > based on a kernel-internal created perf event. (which is what the NMI
> > watchdog really is: a periodic NMI event occuring once per second and
> > running a callback function.)
>
> Yes, this would be great. I'll try to find out some time for this task,
> though no promises :) If someone get it done earlier I would really
> appreciate.
Feel free to do it. We could do it gradual. Maybe we could also then gradually
remove perfctr code for CPU variants that already have perf events support.
Plus later on we could carefully identify bits of APIC support code in
perfctr.c and turn those into minimal perf events PMU drivers.
Ingo