[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180523172819.GW12198@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 19:28:19 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched,tracing: Correct trace_sched_pi_setprio() for
deboosting
On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 04:11:07PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> Since that commit I see during a deboost a task this:
> |futex sched_pi_setprio: comm=futex_requeue_p pid=2234 oldprio=98 newprio=98
> |futex sched_switch: prev_comm=futex_requeue_p prev_pid=2234 prev_prio=120
>
> and after the revert, the `newprio' shows the correct value again:
>
> |futex sched_pi_setprio: comm=futex_requeue_p pid=2220 oldprio=98 newprio=120
> |futex sched_switch: prev_comm=futex_requeue_p prev_pid=2220 prev_prio=120
> @@ -435,7 +435,7 @@ TRACE_EVENT(sched_pi_setprio,
> memcpy(__entry->comm, tsk->comm, TASK_COMM_LEN);
> __entry->pid = tsk->pid;
> __entry->oldprio = tsk->prio;
> - __entry->newprio = pi_task ? pi_task->prio : tsk->prio;
> + __entry->newprio = new_prio;
> /* XXX SCHED_DEADLINE bits missing */
> ),
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index 092f7c4de903..888df643b99b 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -3823,7 +3823,7 @@ void rt_mutex_setprio(struct task_struct *p, struct task_struct *pi_task)
> goto out_unlock;
> }
>
> - trace_sched_pi_setprio(p, pi_task);
> + trace_sched_pi_setprio(p, prio);
at this point:
prio = pi_task ? min(p->normal_prio, pi->task->prio) : p->normal_prio;
(aka __rt_effective_prio)
Should we put that in the tracepoint instead?
> oldprio = p->prio;
>
> if (oldprio == prio)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists