From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Kirill Tkhai <tkhai@yandex.ru>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] sched: schedule_tail() should disable preemption
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 18:57:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141009165713.GA13118@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141009151730.GW10832@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Peter,
let me first say that I understand that cleanups are always subjective.
So if you do not like it - I won't argue at all.
On 10/09, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 04:57:26PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > but first we need to remove ->saved_preempt_count.
>
> Why do you want to kill that?
Because imo this makes the code a bit simpler. But (perhaps) mostly because
personally I dislike any "special" member in task_struct/thread_info, and
it seems to me that ->saved_preempt_count buys nothing. We only need it
to record/restore the counter before/after switch_to(), a local variably
looks better to me.
But again, see above. If the maintainer doesn't like the cleanup - then
it should be counted as uglification ;)
> Your earlier proposal would penalize every
> !x86 arch by adding extra code to the scheduler core while they already
> automagically preserve their thread_info::preempt_count.
Sure, and it can't be even compiled on !x86.
But this is simple, just we need a new helper, preempt_count_restore(),
defined as nop in asm-generic/preempt.h. Well, perhaps another helper
makes sense, preempt_count_raw() which simply reads the counter, but
this is minor.
After the patch below we can remove ->saved_preempt_count. Including
init_task_preempt_count(), it is no longer needed after the change in
schedule_tail().
No?
Oleg.
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/preempt.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/preempt.h
index 8f32718..695307f 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/preempt.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/preempt.h
@@ -27,6 +27,11 @@ static __always_inline void preempt_count_set(int pc)
raw_cpu_write_4(__preempt_count, pc);
}
+static __always_inline void preempt_count_restore(int pc)
+{
+ preempt_count_set(pc);
+}
+
/*
* must be macros to avoid header recursion hell
*/
diff --git a/include/asm-generic/preempt.h b/include/asm-generic/preempt.h
index eb6f9e6..14de30e 100644
--- a/include/asm-generic/preempt.h
+++ b/include/asm-generic/preempt.h
@@ -20,6 +20,10 @@ static __always_inline void preempt_count_set(int pc)
*preempt_count_ptr() = pc;
}
+static __always_inline void preempt_count_restore(int pc)
+{
+}
+
/*
* must be macros to avoid header recursion hell
*/
diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index cfe9905..ad8ca02 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -2279,6 +2279,8 @@ asmlinkage __visible void schedule_tail(struct task_struct *prev)
{
struct rq *rq;
+ preempt_count_set(PREEMPT_DISABLED);
+
/* finish_task_switch() drops rq->lock and enables preemtion */
preempt_disable();
rq = this_rq();
@@ -2299,6 +2301,7 @@ context_switch(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev,
struct task_struct *next)
{
struct mm_struct *mm, *oldmm;
+ int pc;
prepare_task_switch(rq, prev, next);
@@ -2333,10 +2336,12 @@ context_switch(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev,
#endif
context_tracking_task_switch(prev, next);
+
+ pc = preempt_count();
/* Here we just switch the register state and the stack. */
switch_to(prev, next, prev);
-
barrier();
+ preempt_count_restore(pc);
/*
* this_rq must be evaluated again because prev may have moved
* CPUs since it called schedule(), thus the 'rq' on its stack
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-09 17:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-07 19:50 [PATCH 0/1] sched: fix the PREEMPT_ACTIVE check in __trace_sched_switch_state() Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-07 19:51 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-10 9:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-10 9:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-28 11:05 ` [tip:sched/core] sched: Fix " tip-bot for Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-08 8:00 ` [PATCH 0/1] sched: fix " Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-08 18:33 ` [PATCH 0/2] (Was: sched: fix the PREEMPT_ACTIVE check in __trace_sched_switch_state()) Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-08 18:33 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched: schedule_tail() should disable preemption Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-08 19:36 ` [PATCH v2 " Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-08 21:37 ` Kirill Tkhai
2014-10-09 14:57 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-09 15:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-09 16:57 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2014-10-09 17:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-09 17:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-09 17:55 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-28 11:06 ` [tip:sched/core] sched: Fix schedule_tail() to " tip-bot for Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-08 18:33 ` [PATCH 2/2] sched: kill task_preempt_count() Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-28 11:06 ` [tip:sched/core] sched: Kill task_preempt_count() tip-bot for Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-09 19:32 ` [PATCH 0/1] sched: make finish_task_switch() return struct rq * Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-09 19:32 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-10 10:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-10 17:06 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-10 20:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-14 17:57 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-28 11:06 ` [tip:sched/core] sched: Make finish_task_switch() return ' struct rq *' tip-bot for Oleg Nesterov
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=20141009165713.GA13118@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tkhai@yandex.ru \
/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.