[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081108083206.GA16667@elte.hu>
Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2008 09:32:06 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, suresh.b.siddha@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: fix a bug in sched domain degenerate
* Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> Hi Ingo,
>
> I just read the modified changelog in the git-log, and it is
> wrong (or maybe my fix is wrong?), I should have explained
> the bug clearer. :(
>
> I'm writing this mail to confirm if my thought and fix is
> right or not.
>
> > commit f29c9b1ccb52904ee442a933cf3dee628f9f4e62
> > Author: Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
> > Date: Thu Nov 6 09:45:16 2008 +0800
> >
> > sched: fix a bug in sched domain degenerate
> >
> > Impact: re-add incorrectly eliminated sched domain layers
> >
>
> This statement is wrong..
that's OK, because the patch is correct :-)
> > (1) on i386 with SCHED_SMT and SCHED_MC enabled
> > # mount -t cgroup -o cpuset xxx /mnt
> > # echo 0 > /mnt/cpuset.sched_load_balance
> > # mkdir /mnt/0
> > # echo 0 > /mnt/0/cpuset.cpus
> > # dmesg
> > CPU0 attaching sched-domain:
> > domain 0: span 0 level CPU
> > groups: 0
> >
>
> I think this behavior is wrong.
>
> > (2) on i386 with SCHED_MC enabled but SCHED_SMT disabled
> > # same with (1)
> > # dmesg
> > CPU0 attaching NULL sched-domain.
> >
>
> And this is right. CPU domain has only 1 cpu so it does not contribute
> to scheduling, so it can be removed.
>
> > The bug is that some sched domains may be skipped unintentionally when
> > degenerating (optimizing) sched domains.
> >
>
> The bug is, some sched domains won't be checked in the for loop due
> to the bug, so they have no chance to be removed.
>
> In the for loop, we check if the parents domains can be removed:
>
> cur_ptr
> |
> v
> SMT--->MC--->CPU--->NULL
>
> (parent MC is checked and can be removed)
>
> =>
>
> cur_ptr
> |
> v
> SMT--->CPU--->NULL
>
> (break out of the for loop, because cur_ptr->parent == NULL)
>
> so CPU domain won't be checked. When we delete MC domain, the pointer
> should not move forwards, so the fix is:
>
> cur_ptr
> |
> v
> SMT--->CPU--->NULL
ah, ok - i misunderstood the direction of the fix. So it strengthens
degeneration - which is a valid fix too. And the commit message
remains there to shame my reading skills forever ;-)
Ingo
--
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