From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Lutomirski Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] sched: Add NEED_RESCHED to the preempt_count Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 18:59:57 -0700 Message-ID: <522FCE9D.4010707@amacapital.net> References: <20130910130811.507933095@infradead.org> <20130910132011.116593485@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20130910132011.116593485@infradead.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Andi Kleen , Peter Anvin , Mike Galbraith , Thomas Gleixner , Arjan van de Ven , Frederic Weisbecker , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On 09/10/2013 06:08 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > In order to combine the preemption and need_resched test we need to > fold the need_resched information into the preempt_count value. > > We keep the existing TIF_NEED_RESCHED infrastructure in place but at 3 > sites test it and fold its value into preempt_count; namely: > > - resched_task() when setting TIF_NEED_RESCHED on the current task > - scheduler_ipi() when resched_task() sets TIF_NEED_RESCHED on a > remote task it follows it up with a reschedule IPI > and we can modify the cpu local preempt_count from > there. > - cpu_idle_loop() for when resched_task() found tsk_is_polling(). It looks like the intel_idle code can get confused if TIF_NEED_RESCHED is set but the preempt resched bit is not -- the need_resched call between monitor and mwait won't notice TIF_NEED_RESCHED. Is this condition possible? --Andy