[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180528155306.GU12180@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2018 17:53:06 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Paul Burton <paul.burton@...s.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched: Make select_task_rq() require cpu_active()
for user tasks
On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 08:45:16AM -0700, Paul Burton wrote:
> > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > @@ -1562,7 +1562,7 @@ int select_task_rq(struct task_struct *p
> > * not worry about this generic constraint ]
> > */
> > if (unlikely(!cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, &p->cpus_allowed) ||
> > - !cpu_online(cpu)))
> > + (is_per_cpu_kthread(p) ? !cpu_online(cpu) : !cpu_active(cpu)))
> > cpu = select_fallback_rq(task_cpu(p), p);
> >
> > return cpu;
>
> Yes this looks good to me.
>
> Are you planning to submit your change to introduce
> is_per_cpu_kthread(), or shall I?
I've got the lot; I just need to write a better changelog for my old
(now rebased) patch and make a small note in your patch, but will feed
them to Ingo when done.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists