[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1263400134.3853.283.camel@Palantir>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 17:28:54 +0100
From: Dario Faggioli <faggioli@...dalf.sssup.it>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
michael trimarchi <michael@...dence.eu.com>,
Fabio Checconi <fabio@...dalf.sssup.it>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Dhaval Giani <dhaval.giani@...il.com>,
Johan Eker <johan.eker@...csson.com>,
"p.faure" <p.faure@...tech.ch>,
Chris Friesen <cfriesen@...tel.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Henrik Austad <henrik@...tad.us>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Darren Hart <darren@...art.com>,
Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <sven@...bigcorporation.com>,
Claudio Scordino <claudio@...dence.eu.com>,
Tommaso Cucinotta <tommaso.cucinotta@...up.it>,
"giuseppe.lipari" <giuseppe.lipari@...up.it>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/12][PATCH] SCHED_DEADLINE: fork and terminate task logic
On Wed, 2010-01-13 at 17:15 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-01-13 at 12:11 +0100, Raistlin wrote:
>
> > > > + } else if (rt_prio(p->prio))
> > > > + p->sched_class = &rt_sched_class;
> > > > + else
> > > > p->sched_class = &fair_sched_class;
> > > >
> > > > #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> > > > @@ -2744,6 +2756,10 @@ static void finish_task_switch(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev)
> > > > if (mm)
> > > > mmdrop(mm);
> > > > if (unlikely(prev_state == TASK_DEAD)) {
> > > > + /* a deadline task is dying: stop the bandwidth timer */
> > > > + if (deadline_task(prev))
> > > > + hrtimer_cancel(&prev->dl.dl_timer);
> > > > +
> > > > /*
> > > > * Remove function-return probe instances associated with this
> > > > * task and put them back on the free list.
> > >
> > > Shouldn't this be done in the ->dequeue_task() callback?
> > >
> > Not sure of this snippet... Actually, it is one of the most disturbing
> > piece of code of this whole scheduler. :-(
> >
> > The reason why it is here is that I think it is needed to call
> > hrtimer_cancel() _without_ holding the rq->lock, is that correct?
>
> I think we can nest the hrtimer base lock inside the rq->lock these
> days, so it should be safe to call while holding it, anyway, lockdep
> will quickly tell you if you try ;-)
>
Nice, I'll try this soon, thanks.
> > It is
>
> Is that a stmt or an unfinished sentence?
>
No, this is nothing, sorry! :-P
Regards,
Dario
--
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, ReTiS Lab, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pisa (Italy)
http://blog.linux.it/raistlin / raistlin@...ga.net /
dario.faggioli@...ber.org
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (198 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists