From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>,
Steven Rostedt <srostedt@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH v3 09/17] Consistency cleanup for this_rq usage
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2007 01:21:13 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071117062404.509253800@goodmis.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20071117062104.177779113@goodmis.org
[-- Attachment #1: 0001-this_rq-consistency-cleanup.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 4525 bytes --]
From: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com>
"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>
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <srostedt@redhat.com>
---
kernel/sched_rt.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
Index: linus.git/kernel/sched_rt.c
===================================================================
--- linus.git.orig/kernel/sched_rt.c
+++ linus.git/kernel/sched_rt.c
@@ -253,7 +253,7 @@ static struct task_struct *pick_next_hig
/* 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;
@@ -267,21 +267,21 @@ static struct rq *find_lock_lowest_rq(st
* 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;
}
}
@@ -289,16 +289,16 @@ static struct rq *find_lock_lowest_rq(st
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;
@@ -323,21 +323,21 @@ static struct rq *find_lock_lowest_rq(st
* 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;
}
@@ -347,24 +347,24 @@ static int push_rt_task(struct rq *this_
* 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;
@@ -375,7 +375,7 @@ static int push_rt_task(struct rq *this_
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);
--
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-11-17 6:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-11-17 6:21 [PATCH v3 00/17] New RT Task Balancing -v3 Steven Rostedt
2007-11-17 6:21 ` [PATCH v3 01/17] Add rt_nr_running accounting Steven Rostedt
2007-11-17 6:21 ` [PATCH v3 02/17] track highest prio queued on runqueue Steven Rostedt
2007-11-17 6:21 ` [PATCH v3 03/17] push RT tasks Steven Rostedt
2007-11-17 6:21 ` [PATCH v3 04/17] RT overloaded runqueues accounting Steven Rostedt
2007-11-17 6:21 ` [PATCH v3 05/17] pull RT tasks Steven Rostedt
2007-11-17 6:21 ` [PATCH v3 06/17] wake up balance RT Steven Rostedt
2007-11-17 6:21 ` [PATCH v3 07/17] disable CFS RT load balancing Steven Rostedt
2007-11-17 6:21 ` [PATCH v3 08/17] Cache cpus_allowed weight for optimizing migration Steven Rostedt
2007-11-17 6:21 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2007-11-17 6:21 ` [PATCH v3 10/17] Remove some CFS specific code from the wakeup path of RT tasks Steven Rostedt
2007-11-17 17:35 ` Gregory Haskins
2007-11-17 18:51 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-11-17 6:21 ` [PATCH v3 11/17] RT: Break out the search function Steven Rostedt
2007-11-17 6:21 ` [PATCH v3 12/17] Allow current_cpu to be included in search Steven Rostedt
2007-11-17 6:21 ` [PATCH v3 13/17] RT: Pre-route RT tasks on wakeup Steven Rostedt
2007-11-17 6:21 ` [PATCH v3 14/17] Optimize our cpu selection based on topology Steven Rostedt
2007-11-17 6:21 ` [PATCH v3 15/17] RT: Optimize rebalancing Steven Rostedt
2007-11-17 6:21 ` [PATCH v3 16/17] Fix schedstat handling Steven Rostedt
2007-11-17 17:40 ` Gregory Haskins
2007-11-17 18:52 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-11-17 6:21 ` [PATCH v3 17/17] --- kernel/sched_rt.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) Steven Rostedt
2007-11-17 6:33 ` [PATCH v3 17/17] (Avoid overload) Steven Rostedt
2007-11-17 17:42 ` Gregory Haskins
2007-11-17 18:55 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-11-17 17:46 ` Gregory Haskins
2007-11-19 16:34 ` [PATCH] RT: restore the migratable conditional Gregory Haskins
2007-11-17 8:14 ` [PATCH v3 00/17] New RT Task Balancing -v3 Jon Masters
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=20071117062404.509253800@goodmis.org \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=clameter@sgi.com \
--cc=ghaskins@novell.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=srostedt@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.