[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1538490221-18028-1-git-send-email-peng.hao2@zte.com.cn>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2018 22:23:41 +0800
From: Peng Hao <peng.hao2@....com.cn>
To: mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Peng Hao <peng.hao2@....com.cn>
Subject: [PATCH] sched/rt : return accurate release rq lock info
find_lock_lowest_rq may or not releease rq lock, but it is fuzzy.
If not releasing rq lock, it is unnecessary to re-call
pick_next_oushable_task.
Signed-off-by: Peng Hao <peng.hao2@....com.cn>
---
kernel/sched/rt.c | 7 +++++++
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/rt.c b/kernel/sched/rt.c
index 2e2955a..4d7d322 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/rt.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/rt.c
@@ -1719,6 +1719,7 @@ static struct rq *find_lock_lowest_rq(struct task_struct *task, struct rq *rq)
{
struct rq *lowest_rq = NULL;
int tries;
+ bool release_lock = false;
int cpu;
for (tries = 0; tries < RT_MAX_TRIES; tries++) {
@@ -1741,6 +1742,7 @@ static struct rq *find_lock_lowest_rq(struct task_struct *task, struct rq *rq)
/* if the prio of this runqueue changed, try again */
if (double_lock_balance(rq, lowest_rq)) {
+ release_lock = true;
/*
* We had to unlock the run queue. In
* the mean time, task could have
@@ -1768,6 +1770,8 @@ static struct rq *find_lock_lowest_rq(struct task_struct *task, struct rq *rq)
lowest_rq = NULL;
}
+ if (!lowest_rq && !release_lock)
+ lowest_rq = (void *) -1;
return lowest_rq;
}
@@ -1863,6 +1867,9 @@ static int push_rt_task(struct rq *rq)
goto retry;
}
+ if (lowest_rq == (void *) -1)
+ goto out;
+
deactivate_task(rq, next_task, 0);
set_task_cpu(next_task, lowest_rq->cpu);
activate_task(lowest_rq, next_task, 0);
--
1.8.3.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists