All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Wang <wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>, ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Accelerate "pick_next_entity" under special condition
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 17:50:15 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F13F2D7.6060605@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F13EFBE.1030002@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

On 01/16/2012 05:37 PM, Michael Wang wrote:

> From: Michael Wang <wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> 
> We can avoid some useless operation in some special condition.
> 
> For example:
> If we have "cfs_rq->next" and it can be use, we just return it directly.
> 


Please tell me if I got wrong understanding on these code, I think the change can 
maintain the old logic and suppose to be a little quick in some condition.
 

> Signed-off-by: Michael Wang <wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/fair.c |   28 +++++++++++++++++-----------
>  1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 84adb2d..9fc2c3c 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -1295,6 +1295,8 @@ set_next_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se)
>  static int
>  wakeup_preempt_entity(struct sched_entity *curr, struct sched_entity *se);
>  
> +#define ENTITY_PREEMPT_ALLOWED(prev,next)	(wakeup_preempt_entity(prev, next) < 1)


I want to use a name which can make it more easy to be understand, please tell me 
if it is a bad idea...

Regards,
Michael Wang

> +
>  /*
>   * Pick the next process, keeping these things in mind, in this order:
>   * 1) keep things fair between processes/task groups
> @@ -1308,29 +1310,33 @@ static struct sched_entity *pick_next_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
>  	struct sched_entity *left = se;
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * Avoid running the skip buddy, if running something else can
> -	 * be done without getting too unfair.
> +	 * Someone really wants this to run. If it's not unfair, run it.
>  	 */
> -	if (cfs_rq->skip == se) {
> -		struct sched_entity *second = __pick_next_entity(se);
> -		if (second && wakeup_preempt_entity(second, left) < 1)
> -			se = second;
> +	if (cfs_rq->next && ENTITY_PREEMPT_ALLOWED(cfs_rq->next, left)) {
> +		se = cfs_rq->next;
> +		goto out;
>  	}
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * Prefer last buddy, try to return the CPU to a preempted task.
>  	 */
> -	if (cfs_rq->last && wakeup_preempt_entity(cfs_rq->last, left) < 1)
> +	if (cfs_rq->last && ENTITY_PREEMPT_ALLOWED(cfs_rq->last, left)) {
>  		se = cfs_rq->last;
> +		goto out;
> +	}
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * Someone really wants this to run. If it's not unfair, run it.
> +	 * Avoid running the skip buddy, if running something else can
> +	 * be done without getting too unfair.
>  	 */
> -	if (cfs_rq->next && wakeup_preempt_entity(cfs_rq->next, left) < 1)
> -		se = cfs_rq->next;
> +	if (cfs_rq->skip == se) {
> +		struct sched_entity *second = __pick_next_entity(se);
> +		if (second && ENTITY_PREEMPT_ALLOWED(second, left))
> +			se = second;
> +	}
>  
> +out:
>  	clear_buddies(cfs_rq, se);
> -
>  	return se;
>  }
>  



  reply	other threads:[~2012-01-16  9:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-01-16  9:37 [PATCH] sched: Accelerate "pick_next_entity" under special condition Michael Wang
2012-01-16  9:50 ` Michael Wang [this message]
2012-01-16  9:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-01-16 10:34   ` Michael Wang
2012-01-17  2:36   ` [PATCH v2] " Michael Wang
2012-01-17  2:41     ` Michael Wang
2012-01-17  2:58     ` Xiaotian Feng
2012-01-17  3:04       ` Michael Wang
2012-01-25 15:55         ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-01-26 10:04           ` Ingo Molnar
2012-01-27  1:22             ` Michael Wang
2012-01-27  4:42               ` Cong Wang
2012-01-29  6:32                 ` Michael Wang
2012-01-29 16:33                   ` Ingo Molnar
2012-01-30  3:18                     ` Michael Wang
2012-01-30  3:25                       ` Cong Wang
2012-01-30  5:47                         ` Michael Wang
2012-07-03  6:34                           ` [PATCH] sched: remove useless code in yield_to Michael Wang
2012-07-12  5:45                             ` Michael Wang
2012-07-12 14:07                             ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-07-12 18:44                               ` Mike Galbraith
2012-07-16  2:39                               ` Michael Wang
2012-08-17  6:56                               ` Michael Wang
2012-08-17  9:43                                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-08-10  3:05                             ` Michael Wang
2012-08-10  3:10                               ` Michael Wang
2012-08-10  5:52                                 ` Mike Galbraith
2012-09-04 18:50                             ` [tip:sched/core] sched: Remove useless code in yield_to() tip-bot for Michael Wang
2012-01-27  0:56           ` [PATCH v2] sched: Accelerate "pick_next_entity" under special condition Michael Wang

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=4F13F2D7.6060605@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    /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.