[rtems commit] epiphany: Delete CPU_UNROLL_ENQUEUE_PRIORITY

[Sebastian Huber]

Module:    rtems
Branch:    master
Commit:    6959e663e46b8a0062a7fa131b0cc136922c6a54
Changeset: http://git.rtems.org/rtems/commit/?id=6959e663e46b8a0062a7fa131b0cc136922c6a54

Author:    Sebastian Huber <sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de>
Date:      Wed Oct  7 09:13:23 2015 +0200

epiphany: Delete CPU_UNROLL_ENQUEUE_PRIORITY

---

 cpukit/score/cpu/epiphany/rtems/score/cpu.h | 21 ---------------------
 1 file changed, 21 deletions(-)

diff --git a/cpukit/score/cpu/epiphany/rtems/score/cpu.h b/cpukit/score/cpu/epiphany/rtems/score/cpu.h
index fb5e6b2..e0c5682 100644
--- a/cpukit/score/cpu/epiphany/rtems/score/cpu.h
+++ b/cpukit/score/cpu/epiphany/rtems/score/cpu.h
@@ -70,27 +70,6 @@ extern "C" {
 #define CPU_INLINE_ENABLE_DISPATCH       FALSE
 
 /*
- *  Should the body of the search loops in _Thread_queue_Enqueue_priority
- *  be unrolled one time?  In unrolled each iteration of the loop examines
- *  two "nodes" on the chain being searched.  Otherwise, only one node
- *  is examined per iteration.
- *
- *  If TRUE, then the loops are unrolled.
- *  If FALSE, then the loops are not unrolled.
- *
- *  The primary factor in making this decision is the cost of disabling
- *  and enabling interrupts (_ISR_Flash) versus the cost of rest of the
- *  body of the loop.  On some CPUs, the flash is more expensive than
- *  one iteration of the loop body.  In this case, it might be desirable
- *  to unroll the loop.  It is important to note that on some CPUs, this
- *  code is the longest interrupt disable period in RTEMS.  So it is
- *  necessary to strike a balance when setting this parameter.
- *
- */
-
-#define CPU_UNROLL_ENQUEUE_PRIORITY      TRUE
-
-/*
  *  Does RTEMS manage a dedicated interrupt stack in software?
  *
  *  If TRUE, then a stack is allocated in _ISR_Handler_initialization.