linux-kernel - [PATCH 13/23] Subject: SCHED - Pre-route RT tasks on wakeup

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20071204204531.3567.99493.stgit@novell1.haskins.net>
Date:	Tue, 04 Dec 2007 15:45:31 -0500
From:	Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>
To:	mingo@...e.hu
Cc:	rostedt@...dmis.org, ghaskins@...ell.com,
	linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 13/23] Subject: SCHED - Pre-route RT tasks on wakeup

In the original patch series that Steven Rostedt and I worked on together,
we both took different approaches to low-priority wakeup path.  I utilized
"pre-routing" (push the task away to a less important RQ before activating)
approach, while Steve utilized a "post-routing" approach.  The advantage of
my approach is that you avoid the overhead of a wasted activate/deactivate
cycle and peripherally related burdens.  The advantage of Steve's method is
that it neatly solves an issue preventing a "pull" optimization from being
deployed.

In the end, we ended up deploying Steve's idea.  But it later dawned on me
that we could get the best of both worlds by deploying both ideas together,
albeit slightly modified.

The idea is simple:  Use a "light-weight" lookup for pre-routing, since we
only need to approximate a good home for the task.  And we also retain the
post-routing push logic to clean up any inaccuracies caused by a condition
of "priority mistargeting" caused by the lightweight lookup.  Most of the
time, the pre-routing should work and yield lower overhead.  In the cases
where it doesnt, the post-router will bat cleanup.

Signed-off-by: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>
---

 kernel/sched_rt.c |   19 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched_rt.c b/kernel/sched_rt.c
index 7e444f4..ea40851 100644
--- a/kernel/sched_rt.c
+++ b/kernel/sched_rt.c
@@ -149,8 +149,27 @@ yield_task_rt(struct rq *rq)
 }

 #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
+static int find_lowest_rq(struct task_struct *task);
+
 static int select_task_rq_rt(struct task_struct *p, int sync)
 {
+	struct rq *rq = task_rq(p);
+
+	/*
+	 * If the task will not preempt the RQ, try to find a better RQ
+	 * before we even activate the task
+	 */
+	if ((p->prio >= rq->rt.highest_prio)
+	    && (p->nr_cpus_allowed > 1)) {
+		int cpu = find_lowest_rq(p);
+
+		return (cpu == -1) ? task_cpu(p) : cpu;
+	}
+
+	/*
+	 * Otherwise, just let it ride on the affined RQ and the
+	 * post-schedule router will push the preempted task away
+	 */
 	return task_cpu(p);
 }
 #endif /* CONFIG_SMP */

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