[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180205105708.upjcsok3zbk5zxlk@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2018 11:57:08 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Wen Yang <wen.yang99@....com.cn>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jiang.biao2@....com.cn,
zhong.weidong@....com.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/rt: Make update_curr_rt() more accurate
* Wen Yang <wen.yang99@....com.cn> wrote:
> rq->clock_task may be updated between the two calls of
> rq_clock_task() in update_curr_rt(). Calling rq_clock_task() only
> once makes it more accurate and efficient, taking update_curr() as
> reference.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wen Yang <wen.yang99@....com.cn>
> Reviewed-by: Jiang Biao <jiang.biao2@....com.cn>
> ---
> kernel/sched/rt.c | 5 +++--
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/rt.c b/kernel/sched/rt.c
> index 4056c19..d6d2a65 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/rt.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/rt.c
> @@ -950,12 +950,13 @@ static void update_curr_rt(struct rq *rq)
> {
> struct task_struct *curr = rq->curr;
> struct sched_rt_entity *rt_se = &curr->rt;
> + u64 now = rq_clock_task(rq);
> u64 delta_exec;
>
> if (curr->sched_class != &rt_sched_class)
> return;
>
> - delta_exec = rq_clock_task(rq) - curr->se.exec_start;
> + delta_exec = now - curr->se.exec_start;
Small nit: shouldn't we calculate 'now' after the return?
OTOH that 'return' should only be triggered statistically AFAICS, i.e. very
rarely.
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists