sched: Remove unnecessary RCU exclusion

As Nick pointed out, and realized by myself when doing:
   sched: Fix balance vs hotplug race
the patch:
   sched: for_each_domain() vs RCU

is wrong, sched_domains are freed after synchronize_sched(), which
means disabling preemption is enough.

Reported-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
LKML-Reference: <new-submission>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>

diff --git a/kernel/sched_fair.c b/kernel/sched_fair.c
index e9f5daee12c7e876d0ced0faed231c567a611e8b..c163a285bf0516ca48d222b33b6347d5ea34c73a 100644 (file)
--- a/kernel/sched_fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched_fair.c
@@ -1403,7 +1403,6 @@ static int select_task_rq_fair(struct task_struct *p, int sd_flag, int wake_flag
                new_cpu = prev_cpu;
        }
 
-       rcu_read_lock();
        for_each_domain(cpu, tmp) {
                /*
                 * If power savings logic is enabled for a domain, see if we
@@ -1484,10 +1483,8 @@ static int select_task_rq_fair(struct task_struct *p, int sd_flag, int wake_flag
                        update_shares(tmp);
        }
 
-       if (affine_sd && wake_affine(affine_sd, p, sync)) {
-               new_cpu = cpu;
-               goto out;
-       }
+       if (affine_sd && wake_affine(affine_sd, p, sync))
+               return cpu;
 
        while (sd) {
                int load_idx = sd->forkexec_idx;
@@ -1528,8 +1525,6 @@ static int select_task_rq_fair(struct task_struct *p, int sd_flag, int wake_flag
                /* while loop will break here if sd == NULL */
        }
 
-out:
-       rcu_read_unlock();
        return new_cpu;
 }
 #endif /* CONFIG_SMP */