[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080402075255.GE17617@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 13:22:55 +0530
From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ibm.com>
Subject: set_task_rq bug?
For the case of CONFIG_RT_GROUP_SCHED and !CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED, this
piece of code seems to be wrong?
/* Change a task's cfs_rq and parent entity if it moves across
* CPUs/groups */
static inline void set_task_rq(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int cpu)
{
#ifdef CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED
p->se.cfs_rq = task_group(p)->cfs_rq[cpu];
p->se.parent = task_group(p)->se[cpu];
#endif
#ifdef CONFIG_RT_GROUP_SCHED
p->rt.rt_rq = task_group(p)->rt_rq[cpu];
p->rt.parent = task_group(p)->rt_se[cpu];
#endif
}
Basically for the above config case, a task's p->se.cfs_rq is never set,
which seems to be incorrect, as lot of sched_fair.c (for ex:
enqueue_task_fair) banks on the availability of this information. It should
atleast be set to &rq->cfs?
--
Regards,
vatsa
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists