[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1106222047400.11814@ionos>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 20:52:47 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/4] sched: Separate the scheduler entry for preemption
On Wed, 22 Jun 2011, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 05:52:13PM -0000, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > Block-IO and workqueues call into notifier functions from the
> > scheduler core code with interrupts and preemption disabled. These
> > calls should be made before entering the scheduler core.
> >
> > To simplify this, separate the scheduler core code into
> > __schedule(). __schedule() is directly called from the places which
> > set PREEMPT_ACTIVE and from schedule(). This allows us to add the work
> > checks into schedule(), so they are only called when a task voluntary
> > goes to sleep.
>
> I don't think that works. We'll need to flush the block requests even
> for an involuntary schedule.
We don't do that right now as that code conditional on:
if (prev->state && !(preempt_count() & PREEMPT_ACTIVE)) {
Also blk_flush_plug_list() when called from io_schedule() is
preemptible, so you might be preempted in the middle of the list
operations, so calling into it when preempted would result in an utter
disaster.
Thanks,
tglx
--
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