From: Greg KH on
2.6.33-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

-----------------

From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz(a)infradead.org>

commit 24691ea964cc0123e386b661e03a86a481c6ee79 upstream.

A recent commit introduced a preemption warning for
perf_clock(), use raw_smp_processor_id() to avoid this, it
really doesn't matter which cpu we use here.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra(a)chello.nl>
LKML-Reference: <1267198583.22519.684.camel(a)laptop>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo(a)elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh(a)suse.de>

---
kernel/perf_event.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- a/kernel/perf_event.c
+++ b/kernel/perf_event.c
@@ -248,7 +248,7 @@ static void perf_unpin_context(struct pe

static inline u64 perf_clock(void)
{
- return cpu_clock(smp_processor_id());
+ return cpu_clock(raw_smp_processor_id());
}

/*


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