[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180504094716.GL12217@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 11:47:16 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Rohit Jain <rohit.k.jain@...cle.com>
Cc: matt@...eblueprint.co.uk, mingo@...nel.org,
dhaval.giani@...cle.com, subhra.mazumdar@...cle.com,
steven.sistare@...cle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] sched/core: Don't schedule threads on pre-empted vcpus
On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 01:52:10PM -0700, Rohit Jain wrote:
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index 5e10aae..75d1ecf 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -4033,6 +4033,9 @@ int idle_cpu(int cpu)
> return 0;
> #endif
>
> + if (vcpu_is_preempted(cpu))
> + return 0;
> +
> return 1;
> }
Basically OK with this, but did you consider idle_cpu() usage outside of
select_idle_sibling()?
For instance, I think got_nohz_idle_kick() isn't quite right with this
on. Similarly for scheduler_tick(), that wants the actual idle state.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists