linux-kernel - [RFCv7 PATCH 05/10] sched/{core,fair}: trigger OPP change request on fork()

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 22 Feb 2016 17:22:45 -0800
From:	Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@...aro.org>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc:	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>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>
Subject: [RFCv7 PATCH 05/10] sched/{core,fair}: trigger OPP change request on fork()

From: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>

Patch "sched/fair: add triggers for OPP change requests" introduced OPP
change triggers for enqueue_task_fair(), but the trigger was operating only
for wakeups. Fact is that it makes sense to consider wakeup_new also (i.e.,
fork()), as we don't know anything about a newly created task and thus we
most certainly want to jump to max OPP to not harm performance too much.

However, it is not currently possible (or at least it wasn't evident to me
how to do so :/) to tell new wakeups from other (non wakeup) operations.

This patch introduces an additional flag in sched.h that is only set at
fork() time and it is then consumed in enqueue_task_fair() for our purpose.

cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>
Signed-off-by: Steve Muckle <smuckle@...aro.org>
---
 kernel/sched/core.c  | 2 +-
 kernel/sched/fair.c  | 9 +++------
 kernel/sched/sched.h | 1 +
 3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index 87ca0be..86297a2 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -2553,7 +2553,7 @@ void wake_up_new_task(struct task_struct *p)
 #endif
 
 	rq = __task_rq_lock(p);
-	activate_task(rq, p, 0);
+	activate_task(rq, p, ENQUEUE_WAKEUP_NEW);
 	p->on_rq = TASK_ON_RQ_QUEUED;
 	trace_sched_wakeup_new(p);
 	check_preempt_curr(rq, p, WF_FORK);
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index f1f00a4..e7fab8f 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -4308,7 +4308,8 @@ enqueue_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)
 {
 	struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq;
 	struct sched_entity *se = &p->se;
-	int task_new = !(flags & ENQUEUE_WAKEUP);
+	int task_new = flags & ENQUEUE_WAKEUP_NEW;
+	int task_wakeup = flags & ENQUEUE_WAKEUP;
 
 	for_each_sched_entity(se) {
 		if (se->on_rq)
@@ -4349,12 +4350,8 @@ enqueue_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)
 		 * because we get here also during load balancing, but
 		 * in these cases it seems wise to trigger as single
 		 * request after load balancing is done.
-		 *
-		 * XXX: how about fork()? Do we need a special
-		 *      flag/something to tell if we are here after a
-		 *      fork() (wakeup_task_new)?
 		 */
-		if (!task_new)
+		if (task_new || task_wakeup)
 			update_capacity_of(cpu_of(rq));
 	}
 	hrtick_update(rq);
diff --git a/kernel/sched/sched.h b/kernel/sched/sched.h
index 17908dd..9c26be2 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/sched.h
+++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h
@@ -1140,6 +1140,7 @@ extern const u32 sched_prio_to_wmult[40];
 #endif
 #define ENQUEUE_REPLENISH	0x08
 #define ENQUEUE_RESTORE	0x10
+#define ENQUEUE_WAKEUP_NEW	0x20
 
 #define DEQUEUE_SLEEP		0x01
 #define DEQUEUE_SAVE		0x02
-- 
2.4.10