From: Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@gmail.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] schedule: simplify the reacquire_kernel_lock() logic
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 21:11:55 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100519131155.GB2216@zhy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100519125711.GA30199@redhat.com>
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 02:57:11PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> - Contrary to what 6d558c3a says, there is no need to reload
> prev = rq->curr after the context switch. You always schedule
> back to where you came from, prev must be equal to current
> even if cpu/rq was changed.
>
> - This also means reacquire_kernel_lock() can use prev instead
> of current.
>
> - No need to reassign switch_count if reacquire_kernel_lock()
> reports need_resched(), we can just move the initial assignment
> down, under the "need_resched_nonpreemptible:" label.
>
> - Try to update the comment after context_switch().
>
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
This make it more clear now. Thank you Oleg.
Acked-by: Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@gmail.com>
> ---
>
> kernel/sched.c | 13 ++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> --- 34-rc1/kernel/sched.c~SCHEDULE_PREV_EQ_TO_CURRENT 2010-05-18 23:32:50.000000000 +0200
> +++ 34-rc1/kernel/sched.c 2010-05-19 14:32:57.000000000 +0200
> @@ -3679,7 +3679,6 @@ need_resched:
> rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
> rcu_sched_qs(cpu);
> prev = rq->curr;
> - switch_count = &prev->nivcsw;
>
> release_kernel_lock(prev);
> need_resched_nonpreemptible:
> @@ -3693,6 +3692,7 @@ need_resched_nonpreemptible:
> update_rq_clock(rq);
> clear_tsk_need_resched(prev);
>
> + switch_count = &prev->nivcsw;
> if (prev->state && !(preempt_count() & PREEMPT_ACTIVE)) {
> if (unlikely(signal_pending_state(prev->state, prev)))
> prev->state = TASK_RUNNING;
> @@ -3719,8 +3719,10 @@ need_resched_nonpreemptible:
>
> context_switch(rq, prev, next); /* unlocks the rq */
> /*
> - * the context switch might have flipped the stack from under
> - * us, hence refresh the local variables.
> + * The context switch have flipped the stack from under us
> + * and restored the local variables which were saved when
> + * this task called schedule() in the past. prev == current
> + * is still correct, but it can be moved to another cpu/rq.
> */
> cpu = smp_processor_id();
> rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
> @@ -3729,11 +3731,8 @@ need_resched_nonpreemptible:
>
> post_schedule(rq);
>
> - if (unlikely(reacquire_kernel_lock(current) < 0)) {
> - prev = rq->curr;
> - switch_count = &prev->nivcsw;
> + if (unlikely(reacquire_kernel_lock(prev)))
> goto need_resched_nonpreemptible;
> - }
>
> preempt_enable_no_resched();
> if (need_resched())
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-19 13:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-18 16:45 [PATCH 1/3] Reduce get_current() to the asm-generic implementation where possible David Howells
2010-05-18 16:45 ` [PATCH 2/3] Mark the 'current' pointer register read-only when such a thing exists David Howells
2010-05-18 21:05 ` David Miller
2010-05-18 16:45 ` [PATCH 3/3] Make get_current() __attribute__((const)) David Howells
2010-05-18 21:22 ` schedule() && prev/current (Was: [PATCH 3/3] Make get_current() __attribute__((const))) Oleg Nesterov
2010-05-19 6:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-05-19 10:27 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-05-19 10:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-05-19 12:57 ` [PATCH] schedule: simplify the reacquire_kernel_lock() logic Oleg Nesterov
2010-05-19 13:11 ` Yong Zhang [this message]
2010-06-09 10:13 ` [tip:sched/core] sched: Simplify " tip-bot for Oleg Nesterov
2010-05-19 13:07 ` schedule() && prev/current (Was: [PATCH 3/3] Make get_current() __attribute__((const))) Yong Zhang
2010-05-18 17:39 ` [PATCH 1/3] Reduce get_current() to the asm-generic implementation where possible Kyle McMartin
2010-05-18 19:47 ` Jamie Lokier
2010-05-19 6:21 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-19 11:02 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-05-21 10:13 ` David Howells
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=20100519131155.GB2216@zhy \
--to=yong.zhang0@gmail.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
/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.