From: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@gmail.com>,
Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Fix PI handling vs sched_setscheduler()
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 10:08:39 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160120100839.GL8573@e106622-lin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160119111841.GZ6344@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Hi,
On 19/01/16 12:18, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
[...]
> @@ -4097,15 +4099,14 @@ static int __sched_setscheduler(struct t
> if (running)
> p->sched_class->set_curr_task(rq);
> if (queued) {
> - int enqueue_flags = ENQUEUE_RESTORE;
> /*
> * We enqueue to tail when the priority of a task is
> * increased (user space view).
> */
> - if (oldprio <= p->prio)
> - enqueue_flags |= ENQUEUE_HEAD;
> + if (oldprio < p->prio)
> + queue_flags |= ENQUEUE_HEAD;
Was this condition broken before or it needs to be changed now with this
patch?
[...]
> --- a/kernel/sched/sched.h
> +++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h
> @@ -1130,18 +1130,35 @@ static inline void finish_lock_switch(st
> extern const int sched_prio_to_weight[40];
> extern const u32 sched_prio_to_wmult[40];
>
> +/*
> + * {de,en}queue flags:
> + *
> + * SAVE/RESTORE - an otherwise spurious dequeue/enqueue, done to ensure tasks
> + * are in a known state which allows modification. Such pairs
> + * should preserve as much state as possible.
> + *
> + * MOVE - paired with SAVE/RESTORE, explicitly does not preserve the location
> + * in the runqueue.
> + *
> + * ENQUEUE_HEAD - place at front of runqueue (tail if not specificed)
> + *
> + */
Do we want to document all the flags while we are at it? :)
Best,
- Juri
> +
> +#define DEQUEUE_SLEEP 0x01
> +#define DEQUEUE_SAVE 0x02 /* matches ENQUEUE_RESTORE */
> +#define DEQUEUE_MOVE 0x04 /* matches ENQUEUE_MOVE */
> +
> #define ENQUEUE_WAKEUP 0x01
> -#define ENQUEUE_HEAD 0x02
> +#define ENQUEUE_RESTORE 0x02
> +#define ENQUEUE_MOVE 0x04
> +
> +#define ENQUEUE_HEAD 0x08
> +#define ENQUEUE_REPLENISH 0x10
> #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> -#define ENQUEUE_WAKING 0x04 /* sched_class::task_waking was called */
> +#define ENQUEUE_WAKING 0x20 /* sched_class::task_waking was called */
> #else
> #define ENQUEUE_WAKING 0x00
> #endif
> -#define ENQUEUE_REPLENISH 0x08
> -#define ENQUEUE_RESTORE 0x10
> -
> -#define DEQUEUE_SLEEP 0x01
> -#define DEQUEUE_SAVE 0x02
>
> #define RETRY_TASK ((void *)-1UL)
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-20 10:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-19 11:18 [PATCH] sched: Fix PI handling vs sched_setscheduler() Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-20 10:08 ` Juri Lelli [this message]
2016-01-20 10:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-20 10:34 ` Juri Lelli
2016-01-20 11:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=20160120100839.GL8573@e106622-lin \
--to=juri.lelli@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=parri.andrea@gmail.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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.