[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56720EE8.1090507@linaro.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 17:24:56 -0800
From: Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@...aro.org>
To: Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Juri Lelli <Juri.Lelli@....com>,
Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Ricky Liang <jcliang@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [RFCv6 PATCH 03/10] sched: scheduler-driven cpu frequency
selection
Hi Leo,
On 12/15/2015 07:48 PM, Leo Yan wrote:
> I also think "set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE)" will introduce
> logic error when software flow run into "else" block. The reason is
> after you set state with TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, if there have some
> scheduling happen within cpufreq_sched_try_driver_target(), then the
> thread will be remove from rq. But generally we suppose the thread
> will be on rq and can continue run after next tick.
>
> Juri's suggestion can fix this issue. And we can use atomic_t to
> safely accessing gd->requested_freq.
I agree, it's incorrect. As I replied earlier I believe setting the task
state back to TASK_RUNNING at the top of the else block is the easiest fix.
thanks,
Steve
--
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