From: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de, bristot@redhat.com,
vschneid@redhat.com, youssefesmat@google.com, joelaf@google.com,
roman.gushchin@linux.dev, yu.c.chen@intel.com,
kprateek.nayak@amd.com, gautham.shenoy@amd.com,
aboorvad@linux.vnet.ibm.com, wuyun.abel@bytedance.com,
tj@kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com
Subject: [PATCH v4 3/8] sched: Tighten unpinned rq lock window in newidle_balance()
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 18:31:36 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231212003141.216236-4-void@manifault.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231212003141.216236-1-void@manifault.com>
In newidle_balance(), we may drop and reacquire the rq lock in the
load-balance phase of the function. We currently do this before we check
rq->rd->overload or rq->avg_idle, which is unnecessary. Let's tighten
the window where we call rq_unpin_lock().
Suggested-by: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
---
kernel/sched/fair.c | 18 ++++++++----------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index bcea3d55d95d..e1b676bb1fed 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -12296,14 +12296,6 @@ static int newidle_balance(struct rq *this_rq, struct rq_flags *rf)
if (!cpu_active(this_cpu))
return 0;
- /*
- * This is OK, because current is on_cpu, which avoids it being picked
- * for load-balance and preemption/IRQs are still disabled avoiding
- * further scheduler activity on it and we're being very careful to
- * re-start the picking loop.
- */
- rq_unpin_lock(this_rq, rf);
-
rcu_read_lock();
sd = rcu_dereference_check_sched_domain(this_rq->sd);
@@ -12318,6 +12310,13 @@ static int newidle_balance(struct rq *this_rq, struct rq_flags *rf)
}
rcu_read_unlock();
+ /*
+ * This is OK, because current is on_cpu, which avoids it being picked
+ * for load-balance and preemption/IRQs are still disabled avoiding
+ * further scheduler activity on it and we're being very careful to
+ * re-start the picking loop.
+ */
+ rq_unpin_lock(this_rq, rf);
raw_spin_rq_unlock(this_rq);
t0 = sched_clock_cpu(this_cpu);
@@ -12358,6 +12357,7 @@ static int newidle_balance(struct rq *this_rq, struct rq_flags *rf)
rcu_read_unlock();
raw_spin_rq_lock(this_rq);
+ rq_repin_lock(this_rq, rf);
if (curr_cost > this_rq->max_idle_balance_cost)
this_rq->max_idle_balance_cost = curr_cost;
@@ -12384,8 +12384,6 @@ static int newidle_balance(struct rq *this_rq, struct rq_flags *rf)
else
nohz_newidle_balance(this_rq);
- rq_repin_lock(this_rq, rf);
-
return pulled_task;
}
--
2.42.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-12-12 0:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-12-12 0:31 [PATCH v4 0/8] sched: Implement shared runqueue in fair.c David Vernet
2023-12-12 0:31 ` [PATCH v4 1/8] sched: Expose move_queued_task() from core.c David Vernet
2023-12-12 0:31 ` [PATCH v4 2/8] sched: Move is_cpu_allowed() into sched.h David Vernet
2023-12-12 0:31 ` David Vernet [this message]
2023-12-12 0:31 ` [PATCH v4 4/8] sched: Check cpu_active() earlier in newidle_balance() David Vernet
2023-12-12 0:31 ` [PATCH v4 5/8] sched: Enable sched_feat callbacks on enable/disable David Vernet
2023-12-12 0:31 ` [PATCH v4 6/8] sched: Implement shared runqueue in fair.c David Vernet
2023-12-12 0:31 ` [PATCH v4 7/8] sched: Shard per-LLC shared runqueues David Vernet
2023-12-12 0:31 ` [PATCH v4 8/8] sched: Add selftest for SHARED_RUNQ David Vernet
2024-04-17 8:48 ` [PATCH v4 0/8] sched: Implement shared runqueue in fair.c K Prateek Nayak
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=20231212003141.216236-4-void@manifault.com \
--to=void@manifault.com \
--cc=aboorvad@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=gautham.shenoy@amd.com \
--cc=joelaf@google.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=wuyun.abel@bytedance.com \
--cc=youssefesmat@google.com \
--cc=yu.c.chen@intel.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.