I was reading the mcs_spinlock code today and I noticed a comment that
didn't appear to match the code.  This appears to have just been an
oversight during some restructuring of the mcs_spinlock code where
this function was made inline but the comment wasn't updated.

Signed-off-by: Palmer Dabbelt <pal...@dabbelt.com>
 kernel/locking/mcs_spinlock.h | 3 ---
 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/mcs_spinlock.h b/kernel/locking/mcs_spinlock.h
index a2dbac4..f4e94af 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/mcs_spinlock.h
+++ b/kernel/locking/mcs_spinlock.h
@@ -56,9 +56,6 @@ do {                                                          
  * If the lock has already been acquired, then this will proceed to spin
  * on this node->locked until the previous lock holder sets the node->locked
  * in mcs_spin_unlock().
- *
- * We don't inline mcs_spin_lock() so that perf can correctly account for the
- * time spent in this lock function.
 static inline
 void mcs_spin_lock(struct mcs_spinlock **lock, struct mcs_spinlock *node)

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to