public inbox for kvm@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Chris Wright <chrisw@sous-sol.org>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Avi Kiviti <avi@redhat.com>,
	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Anthony Liguori <aliguori@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] sched: add yield_to function
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2010 13:27:24 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CF9368C.8030309@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101203005008.GU10050@sequoia.sous-sol.org>

On 12/02/2010 07:50 PM, Chris Wright wrote:

>> +void requeue_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
>> +{
>> +	assert_spin_locked(&rq->lock);
>> +
>> +	if (!p->se.on_rq || task_running(rq, p) || task_has_rt_policy(p))
>> +		return;
>
> already checked task_running(rq, p) || task_has_rt_policy(p) w/ rq lock
> held.

OK, I removed the duplicate checks.

>> +
>> +	dequeue_task(rq, p, 0);
>> +	enqueue_task(rq, p, 0);
>
> seems like you could condense to save an update_rq_clock() call at least,
> don't know if the info_queued, info_dequeued need to be updated

Or I can do the whole operation with the task not queued.
Not sure yet what approach I'll take...

>> +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_HRTICK
>> +/*
>> + * Yield the CPU, giving the remainder of our time slice to task p.
>> + * Typically used to hand CPU time to another thread inside the same
>> + * process, eg. when p holds a resource other threads are waiting for.
>> + * Giving priority to p may help get that resource released sooner.
>> + */
>> +void yield_to(struct task_struct *p)
>> +{
>> +	unsigned long flags;
>> +	struct sched_entity *se =&p->se;
>> +	struct rq *rq;
>> +	struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq;
>> +	u64 remain = slice_remain(current);
>> +
>> +	rq = task_rq_lock(p,&flags);
>> +	if (task_running(rq, p) || task_has_rt_policy(p))
>> +		goto out;
>> +	cfs_rq = cfs_rq_of(se);
>> +	se->vruntime -= remain;
>> +	if (se->vruntime<  cfs_rq->min_vruntime)
>> +		se->vruntime = cfs_rq->min_vruntime;
>
> Should these details all be in sched_fair?  Seems like the wrong layer
> here.  And would that condition go the other way?  If new vruntime is
> smaller than min, then it becomes new cfs_rq->min_vruntime?

That would be nice.  Unfortunately, EXPORT_SYMBOL() does
not seem to work right from sched_fair.c, which is included
from sched.c instead of being built from the makefile!

>> diff --git a/kernel/sched_fair.c b/kernel/sched_fair.c
>> index 5119b08..2a0a595 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched_fair.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched_fair.c
>> @@ -974,6 +974,25 @@ entity_tick(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *curr, int queued)
>>    */
>>
>>   #ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_HRTICK
>> +u64 slice_remain(struct task_struct *p)
>> +{
>> +	unsigned long flags;
>> +	struct sched_entity *se =&p->se;
>> +	struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq;
>> +	struct rq *rq;
>> +	u64 slice, ran;
>> +	s64 delta;
>> +
>> +	rq = task_rq_lock(p,&flags);
>> +	cfs_rq = cfs_rq_of(se);
>> +	slice = sched_slice(cfs_rq, se);
>> +	ran = se->sum_exec_runtime - se->prev_sum_exec_runtime;
>> +	delta = slice - ran;
>> +	task_rq_unlock(rq,&flags);
>> +
>> +	return max(delta, 0LL);
>
> Can delta go negative?

Good question.  I don't know.

-- 
All rights reversed

  reply	other threads:[~2010-12-03 18:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-12-02 19:41 [RFC PATCH 0/3] directed yield for Pause Loop Exiting Rik van Riel
2010-12-02 19:43 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] kvm: keep track of which task is running a KVM vcpu Rik van Riel
2010-12-03  1:18   ` Chris Wright
2010-12-03 14:50     ` Rik van Riel
2010-12-03 15:55       ` Chris Wright
2010-12-05 12:40       ` Avi Kivity
2010-12-03 12:17   ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2010-12-03 14:16     ` Rik van Riel
2010-12-05 12:59       ` Avi Kivity
2010-12-02 19:44 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] sched: add yield_to function Rik van Riel
2010-12-03  0:50   ` Chris Wright
2010-12-03 18:27     ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2010-12-03 19:30       ` Chris Wright
2010-12-03 21:30       ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-12-03  5:54   ` Mike Galbraith
2010-12-03 13:46     ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2010-12-03 14:45       ` Mike Galbraith
2010-12-03 14:48         ` Rik van Riel
2010-12-03 15:09           ` Mike Galbraith
2010-12-03 15:35             ` Rik van Riel
2010-12-03 16:20               ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2010-12-03 17:09                 ` Rik van Riel
2010-12-03 17:29                   ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2010-12-03 17:33                     ` Rik van Riel
2010-12-03 17:45                       ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2010-12-03 20:05               ` Mike Galbraith
2010-12-03 21:26             ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-12-03 13:23   ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-12-03 13:30     ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2010-12-03 14:03       ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-12-03 14:06         ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2010-12-03 14:10           ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2010-12-03 21:23             ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-12-04 13:02               ` Rik van Riel
2010-12-10  4:34           ` Rik van Riel
2010-12-10  8:39             ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2010-12-10 14:55               ` Rik van Riel
2010-12-08 17:55     ` Rik van Riel
2010-12-08 20:00       ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-12-08 20:04         ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-12-08 22:59         ` Rik van Riel
2010-12-02 19:45 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] kvm: use yield_to instead of sleep in kvm_vcpu_on_spin Rik van Riel
2010-12-03  2:24   ` Chris Wright
2010-12-05 12:58     ` Avi Kivity
2010-12-05 12:56   ` Avi Kivity
2010-12-08 22:38     ` Rik van Riel
2010-12-09 10:28       ` Avi Kivity
2010-12-09 17:07         ` Rik van Riel
2010-12-11  7:27           ` Avi Kivity
2010-12-02 22:41 ` [RFC PATCH 0/3] directed yield for Pause Loop Exiting Chris Wright
2010-12-05 13:02   ` Avi Kivity
2010-12-10  5:03 ` Balbir Singh
2010-12-10 14:54   ` Rik van Riel
2010-12-11  7:31   ` Avi Kivity
2010-12-11 13:57     ` Balbir Singh
2010-12-13 11:57       ` Avi Kivity
2010-12-13 12:39         ` Balbir Singh
2010-12-13 12:42           ` Avi Kivity
2010-12-13 17:02       ` Rik van Riel
2010-12-14  9:25         ` Balbir Singh

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=4CF9368C.8030309@redhat.com \
    --to=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=aliguori@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=avi@redhat.com \
    --cc=chrisw@sous-sol.org \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox