[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0807011008001.26650@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 10:11:20 -0400 (EDT)
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Dmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@...il.com>
cc: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [sched-devel, patch-rfc] rework #2 of "prioritize non-migratable
tasks over migratable ones"
On Tue, 1 Jul 2008, Dmitry Adamushko wrote:
>
> ---
>
> --- sched_rt-old.c 2008-07-01 11:42:30.000000000 +0200
> +++ sched_rt.c 2008-07-01 15:00:55.000000000 +0200
> @@ -599,11 +599,7 @@ static void __enqueue_rt_entity(struct s
> if (group_rq && (rt_rq_throttled(group_rq) ||
> !group_rq->rt_nr_running)) return;
>
> - if (rt_se->nr_cpus_allowed == 1)
> - list_add(&rt_se->run_list, queue);
> - else
> - list_add_tail(&rt_se->run_list, queue);
> -
> + list_add_tail(&rt_se->run_list, queue);
> __set_bit(rt_se_prio(rt_se), array->bitmap);
>
> inc_rt_tasks(rt_se, rt_rq);
> @@ -689,31 +685,33 @@ static void dequeue_task_rt(struct rq *r
> * followed by enqueue.
> */
> static
> -void requeue_rt_entity(struct rt_rq *rt_rq, struct sched_rt_entity *rt_se)
> +void requeue_rt_entity(struct rt_rq *rt_rq, struct sched_rt_entity
> *rt_se, int head)
> {
> - struct rt_prio_array *array = &rt_rq->active;
> -
> if (on_rt_rq(rt_se)) {
> - list_del_init(&rt_se->run_list);
> - list_add_tail(&rt_se->run_list,
> - array->queue + rt_se_prio(rt_se));
> + struct rt_prio_array *array = &rt_rq->active;
> + struct list_head *queue = array->queue + rt_se_prio(rt_se);
> +
> + if (head)
> + list_move(&rt_se->run_list, queue);
> + else
> + list_move_tail(&rt_se->run_list, queue);
> }
> }
>
> -static void requeue_task_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
> +static void requeue_task_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int head)
> {
> struct sched_rt_entity *rt_se = &p->rt;
> struct rt_rq *rt_rq;
>
> for_each_sched_rt_entity(rt_se) {
> rt_rq = rt_rq_of_se(rt_se);
> - requeue_rt_entity(rt_rq, rt_se);
> + requeue_rt_entity(rt_rq, rt_se, head);
> }
> }
>
> static void yield_task_rt(struct rq *rq)
> {
> - requeue_task_rt(rq, rq->curr);
> + requeue_task_rt(rq, rq->curr, 0);
> }
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> @@ -753,6 +751,29 @@ static int select_task_rq_rt(struct task
> */
> return task_cpu(p);
> }
> +
> +static void check_preempt_equal_prio(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
> +{
> + cpumask_t mask;
> +
> + if (rq->curr.rt.nr_cpus_allowed == 1 || p->rt.nr_cpus_allowed == 1)
> + return;
I can understand why we break out when current is bound to a single CPU,
but why do we break out when p is bound to a single CPU. Don't we want to
push curr off if we can find a CPU for it?
-- Steve
> +
> + if (cpupri_find(&rq->rd->cpupri, p, &mask))
> + return;
> +
> + if (!cpupri_find(&rq->rd->cpupri, rq->curr, &mask))
> + return;
> +
> + /*
> + * There appears to be other cpus that can accept
> + * current and none to run 'p', so lets reschedule
> + * to try and push current away:
> + */
> + requeue_task_rt(rq, p, 1);
> + resched_task(rq->curr);
> +}
> +
> #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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists