All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com>
To: rostedt@goodmis.org
Cc: mingo@elte.hu, dvhltc@us.ibm.com, zijlstra@redhat.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org,
	ghaskins@novell.com
Subject: [PATCH 1/8] RT: Consistency cleanup for this_rq usage
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2007 16:48:37 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071105234837.25451.26924.stgit@lsg> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071105234832.25451.55430.stgit@lsg>

"this_rq" is normally used to denote the RQ on the current cpu
(i.e. "cpu_rq(this_cpu)").  So clean up the usage of this_rq to be
more consistent with the rest of the code.

Signed-off-by: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com>
---

 kernel/sched_rt.c |   46 +++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
 1 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched_rt.c b/kernel/sched_rt.c
index 9b06d7c..0348423 100644
--- a/kernel/sched_rt.c
+++ b/kernel/sched_rt.c
@@ -307,7 +307,7 @@ static struct task_struct *pick_next_highest_task_rt(struct rq *rq,
 
 /* Will lock the rq it finds */
 static struct rq *find_lock_lowest_rq(struct task_struct *task,
-				      struct rq *this_rq)
+				      struct rq *rq)
 {
 	struct rq *lowest_rq = NULL;
 	cpumask_t cpu_mask;
@@ -321,21 +321,21 @@ static struct rq *find_lock_lowest_rq(struct task_struct *task,
 		 * Scan each rq for the lowest prio.
 		 */
 		for_each_cpu_mask(cpu, cpu_mask) {
-			struct rq *rq = &per_cpu(runqueues, cpu);
+			struct rq *curr_rq = &per_cpu(runqueues, cpu);
 
-			if (cpu == this_rq->cpu)
+			if (cpu == rq->cpu)
 				continue;
 
 			/* We look for lowest RT prio or non-rt CPU */
-			if (rq->rt.highest_prio >= MAX_RT_PRIO) {
-				lowest_rq = rq;
+			if (curr_rq->rt.highest_prio >= MAX_RT_PRIO) {
+				lowest_rq = curr_rq;
 				break;
 			}
 
 			/* no locking for now */
-			if (rq->rt.highest_prio > task->prio &&
-			    (!lowest_rq || rq->rt.highest_prio > lowest_rq->rt.highest_prio)) {
-				lowest_rq = rq;
+			if (curr_rq->rt.highest_prio > task->prio &&
+			    (!lowest_rq || curr_rq->rt.highest_prio > lowest_rq->rt.highest_prio)) {
+				lowest_rq = curr_rq;
 			}
 		}
 
@@ -343,16 +343,16 @@ static struct rq *find_lock_lowest_rq(struct task_struct *task,
 			break;
 
 		/* if the prio of this runqueue changed, try again */
-		if (double_lock_balance(this_rq, lowest_rq)) {
+		if (double_lock_balance(rq, lowest_rq)) {
 			/*
 			 * We had to unlock the run queue. In
 			 * the mean time, task could have
 			 * migrated already or had its affinity changed.
 			 * Also make sure that it wasn't scheduled on its rq.
 			 */
-			if (unlikely(task_rq(task) != this_rq ||
+			if (unlikely(task_rq(task) != rq ||
 				     !cpu_isset(lowest_rq->cpu, task->cpus_allowed) ||
-				     task_running(this_rq, task) ||
+				     task_running(rq, task) ||
 				     !task->se.on_rq)) {
 				spin_unlock(&lowest_rq->lock);
 				lowest_rq = NULL;
@@ -377,21 +377,21 @@ static struct rq *find_lock_lowest_rq(struct task_struct *task,
  * running task can migrate over to a CPU that is running a task
  * of lesser priority.
  */
-static int push_rt_task(struct rq *this_rq)
+static int push_rt_task(struct rq *rq)
 {
 	struct task_struct *next_task;
 	struct rq *lowest_rq;
 	int ret = 0;
 	int paranoid = RT_MAX_TRIES;
 
-	assert_spin_locked(&this_rq->lock);
+	assert_spin_locked(&rq->lock);
 
-	next_task = pick_next_highest_task_rt(this_rq, -1);
+	next_task = pick_next_highest_task_rt(rq, -1);
 	if (!next_task)
 		return 0;
 
  retry:
-	if (unlikely(next_task == this_rq->curr)) {
+	if (unlikely(next_task == rq->curr)) {
 		WARN_ON(1);
 		return 0;
 	}
@@ -401,24 +401,24 @@ static int push_rt_task(struct rq *this_rq)
 	 * higher priority than current. If that's the case
 	 * just reschedule current.
 	 */
-	if (unlikely(next_task->prio < this_rq->curr->prio)) {
-		resched_task(this_rq->curr);
+	if (unlikely(next_task->prio < rq->curr->prio)) {
+		resched_task(rq->curr);
 		return 0;
 	}
 
-	/* We might release this_rq lock */
+	/* We might release rq lock */
 	get_task_struct(next_task);
 
 	/* find_lock_lowest_rq locks the rq if found */
-	lowest_rq = find_lock_lowest_rq(next_task, this_rq);
+	lowest_rq = find_lock_lowest_rq(next_task, rq);
 	if (!lowest_rq) {
 		struct task_struct *task;
 		/*
-		 * find lock_lowest_rq releases this_rq->lock
+		 * find lock_lowest_rq releases rq->lock
 		 * so it is possible that next_task has changed.
 		 * If it has, then try again.
 		 */
-		task = pick_next_highest_task_rt(this_rq, -1);
+		task = pick_next_highest_task_rt(rq, -1);
 		if (unlikely(task != next_task) && task && paranoid--) {
 			put_task_struct(next_task);
 			next_task = task;
@@ -429,13 +429,13 @@ static int push_rt_task(struct rq *this_rq)
 
 	assert_spin_locked(&lowest_rq->lock);
 
-	deactivate_task(this_rq, next_task, 0);
+	deactivate_task(rq, next_task, 0);
 	set_task_cpu(next_task, lowest_rq->cpu);
 	activate_task(lowest_rq, next_task, 0);
 
 	resched_task(lowest_rq->curr);
 
-	schedstat_inc(this_rq, rto_pushed);
+	schedstat_inc(rq, rto_pushed);
 
 	spin_unlock(&lowest_rq->lock);
 

  reply	other threads:[~2007-11-06  0:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-11-05 23:48 [PATCH 0/8] RT: scheduler migration/wakeup enhancements Gregory Haskins
2007-11-05 23:48 ` Gregory Haskins [this message]
2007-11-05 23:48 ` [PATCH 2/8] RT: Remove some CFS specific code from the wakeup path of RT tasks Gregory Haskins
2007-11-05 23:48 ` [PATCH 3/8] RT: Break out the search function Gregory Haskins
2007-11-05 23:48 ` [PATCH 4/8] RT: Allow current_cpu to be included in search Gregory Haskins
2007-11-05 23:48 ` [PATCH 5/8] RT: Pre-route RT tasks on wakeup Gregory Haskins
2007-11-05 23:49 ` [PATCH 6/8] RT: Optimize our cpu selection based on topology Gregory Haskins
2007-11-05 23:49 ` [PATCH 7/8] RT: Optimize rebalancing Gregory Haskins
2007-11-05 23:49 ` [PATCH 8/8] RT: Use a 2-d bitmap for searching lowest-pri CPU Gregory Haskins
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-11-05 23:45 [PATCH 0/8] RT: scheduler migration/wakeup enhancements Gregory Haskins
2007-11-05 23:45 ` [PATCH 1/8] RT: Consistency cleanup for this_rq usage Gregory Haskins

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20071105234837.25451.26924.stgit@lsg \
    --to=ghaskins@novell.com \
    --cc=dvhltc@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=zijlstra@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.