[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20201206111555.364264359@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 12:17:18 +0100
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
stable@...r.kernel.org,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>, Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 5.4 14/39] sched/fair: Fix unthrottle_cfs_rq() for leaf_cfs_rq list
From: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
[ Upstream commit 39f23ce07b9355d05a64ae303ce20d1c4b92b957 ]
Although not exactly identical, unthrottle_cfs_rq() and enqueue_task_fair()
are quite close and follow the same sequence for enqueuing an entity in the
cfs hierarchy. Modify unthrottle_cfs_rq() to use the same pattern as
enqueue_task_fair(). This fixes a problem already faced with the latter and
add an optimization in the last for_each_sched_entity loop.
Fixes: fe61468b2cb (sched/fair: Fix enqueue_task_fair warning)
Reported-by Tao Zhou <zohooouoto@...o.com.cn>
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
Reviewed-by: Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>
Reviewed-by: Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200513135528.4742-1-vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
---
kernel/sched/fair.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 200e121101097..3dd7c10d6a582 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -4580,7 +4580,6 @@ void unthrottle_cfs_rq(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
struct rq *rq = rq_of(cfs_rq);
struct cfs_bandwidth *cfs_b = tg_cfs_bandwidth(cfs_rq->tg);
struct sched_entity *se;
- int enqueue = 1;
long task_delta, idle_task_delta;
se = cfs_rq->tg->se[cpu_of(rq)];
@@ -4604,21 +4603,41 @@ void unthrottle_cfs_rq(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
idle_task_delta = cfs_rq->idle_h_nr_running;
for_each_sched_entity(se) {
if (se->on_rq)
- enqueue = 0;
+ break;
+ cfs_rq = cfs_rq_of(se);
+ enqueue_entity(cfs_rq, se, ENQUEUE_WAKEUP);
+
+ cfs_rq->h_nr_running += task_delta;
+ cfs_rq->idle_h_nr_running += idle_task_delta;
+ /* end evaluation on encountering a throttled cfs_rq */
+ if (cfs_rq_throttled(cfs_rq))
+ goto unthrottle_throttle;
+ }
+
+ for_each_sched_entity(se) {
cfs_rq = cfs_rq_of(se);
- if (enqueue)
- enqueue_entity(cfs_rq, se, ENQUEUE_WAKEUP);
+
cfs_rq->h_nr_running += task_delta;
cfs_rq->idle_h_nr_running += idle_task_delta;
+
+ /* end evaluation on encountering a throttled cfs_rq */
if (cfs_rq_throttled(cfs_rq))
- break;
+ goto unthrottle_throttle;
+
+ /*
+ * One parent has been throttled and cfs_rq removed from the
+ * list. Add it back to not break the leaf list.
+ */
+ if (throttled_hierarchy(cfs_rq))
+ list_add_leaf_cfs_rq(cfs_rq);
}
- if (!se)
- add_nr_running(rq, task_delta);
+ /* At this point se is NULL and we are at root level*/
+ add_nr_running(rq, task_delta);
+unthrottle_throttle:
/*
* The cfs_rq_throttled() breaks in the above iteration can result in
* incomplete leaf list maintenance, resulting in triggering the
@@ -4627,7 +4646,8 @@ void unthrottle_cfs_rq(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
for_each_sched_entity(se) {
cfs_rq = cfs_rq_of(se);
- list_add_leaf_cfs_rq(cfs_rq);
+ if (list_add_leaf_cfs_rq(cfs_rq))
+ break;
}
assert_list_leaf_cfs_rq(rq);
--
2.27.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists