[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YP/dEMeULqozIqZd@google.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2021 11:16:48 +0100
From: Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>
To: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
qais.yousef@....com, rickyiu@...gle.com, wvw@...gle.com,
patrick.bellasi@...bug.net, xuewen.yan94@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] sched: Skip priority checks with
SCHED_FLAG_KEEP_PARAMS
On Monday 26 Jul 2021 at 14:56:10 (+0100), Quentin Perret wrote:
> On Thursday 22 Jul 2021 at 10:47:33 (+0200), Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> > (*) This changes the behaviour when setting uclamp values on a DL task.
> >
> > Before uclamp values could be set but now, because of
> >
> > void __getparam_dl(struct task_struct *p, struct sched_attr *attr)
> > ..
> > attr->sched_flags = dl_se->flags
> >
> > SCHED_FLAG_UTIL_CLAMP gets overwritten and __sched_setscheduler() bails in:
> >
> > if (unlikely(policy == p->policy)) {
> > ...
> > retval = 0;
> > goto unlock;
> > }
> > change:
> >
> > I.e. the:
> >
> > if (attr->sched_flags & SCHED_FLAG_UTIL_CLAMP)
> > goto change;
> >
> > can't trigger anymore.
>
> Bah, as you said it doesn't seem to be a big deal, but clearly that was
> unintentional. Let me try and fix this.
While looking at this I found existing bugs in the area. Fixes are here:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210727101103.2729607-1-qperret@google.com/
And with the above series applied this patch should behave correctly
now.
Thanks,
Quentin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists