[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3hptdhsfpw6lmdrwgttdt5twgsjmufzibfzo5cvldttme6wirj@sedyieyjujv7>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2025 14:28:27 +0530
From: "Nysal Jan K.A." <nysal@...ux.ibm.com>
To: I Hsin Cheng <richard120310@...il.com>, mingo@...hat.com
Cc: peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com,
mgorman@...e.de, vschneid@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] sched/fair: Refactor can_migrate_task() to elimate
looping
On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 01:29:47AM +0800, I Hsin Cheng wrote:
> @@ -9404,12 +9404,16 @@ int can_migrate_task(struct task_struct *p, struct lb_env *env)
> return 0;
>
> /* Prevent to re-select dst_cpu via env's CPUs: */
> - for_each_cpu_and(cpu, env->dst_grpmask, env->cpus) {
> - if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, p->cpus_ptr)) {
> - env->flags |= LBF_DST_PINNED;
> - env->new_dst_cpu = cpu;
> - break;
> - }
> + struct cpumask dst_mask;
> +
> + cpumask_and(&dst_mask, env->dst_grpmask, env->cpus);
> + cpumask_and(&dst_mask, &dst_mask, p->cpus_ptr);
> +
> + cpu = cpumask_first(&dst_mask);
Can cpumask_first_and_and() be used instead?
> +
> + if (cpu < nr_cpu_ids) {
> + env->flags |= LBF_DST_PINNED;
> + env->new_dst_cpu = cpu;
> }
>
> return 0;
> --
> 2.43.0
>
--Nysal
Powered by blists - more mailing lists