[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <jhjy2kacleq.mognet@arm.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 14:20:29 +0100
From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>
To: Tao Zhou <ouwen210@...mail.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
bigeasy@...utronix.de, qais.yousef@....com, swood@...hat.com,
juri.lelli@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com,
mgorman@...e.de, bristot@...hat.com, vincent.donnefort@....com,
tj@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2 10/17] sched: Fix migrate_disable() vs set_cpus_allowed_ptr()
On 12/10/20 19:25, Tao Zhou wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> @@ -1989,7 +1994,24 @@ static int affine_move_task(struct rq *rq, struct rq_flags *rf,
> };
> bool complete = false;
>
> - /* Can the task run on the task's current CPU? If so, we're done */
> + /*
> + * Can the task run on the task's current CPU ? If so, we're done.
> + * One scenario can happen here. Consider task T running on CPU P0:
> + *
> + * P0 P1 p2
That naming convention weirds me out, and I'm the one who wrote that...
How about:
https://gitlab.arm.com/linux-arm/linux-vs/-/commit/b30f50c7b2dd1ef70598bbe1a2a90934d894b861
I also have an extra goodie:
https://gitlab.arm.com/linux-arm/linux-vs/-/commits/mainline/review/migrate_disable_peterz_v2_extras/
The whole thing can be cloned via
git@....gitlab.arm.com:linux-arm/linux-vs.git -b mainline/review/migrate_disable_peterz_v2_extras
(I can send those as replies to patch 0 if that helps)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists