From: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@parallels.com>
To: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: <peterz@infradead.org>, <pjt@google.com>, <oleg@redhat.com>,
<rostedt@goodmis.org>, <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>,
<tkhai@yandex.ru>, <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
<mingo@kernel.org>, <nicolas.pitre@linaro.org>
Subject: [PATCH v4 0/6] sched: Add on_rq states and remove several double rq locks
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2014 12:05:54 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1407312354.8424.34.camel@tkhai> (raw)
This series aims to get rid of some places where locks of two RQs are held
at the same time.
Patch [1/6] is a fix/preparation. It's new in v4 version of series.
Patch [2/6] is a preparation/cleanup. It replaces old (task_struct::on_rq == 1)
with new (task_struct::on_rq == ONRQ_QUEUED) everywhere. No functional changes.
Patch [3/6] is main in the series. It introduces new ONRQ_MIGRATING state and
teaches scheduler to understand it (we need little changes in try_to_wake_up()
and task_rq_lock() family). This will be used in the following way:
(we are changing task's rq)
raw_spin_lock(&src_rq->lock);
p = ...; /* Some src_rq task */
dequeue_task(src_rq, p, 0);
p->on_rq = ONRQ_MIGRATING;
set_task_cpu(p, dst_cpu);
raw_spin_unlock(&src_rq->lock);
/*
* Now p is dequeued, and both
* RQ locks are unlocked, but
* its on_rq is not zero.
* Nobody can manipulate p
* while it's migrating,
* even when spinlocks are
* unlocked.
*/
raw_spin_lock(&dst_rq->lock);
p->on_rq = ONRQ_QUEUED;
enqueue_task(dst_rq, p, 0);
raw_spin_unlock(&dst_rq->lock);
Patches [4,5,6/6] remove double locks and use new ONRQ_MIGRATING state.
They allow unlocked using of 3-4 function, which looks safe for me.
The profit is double_rq_lock() is not need now, so we reduce the
total time when RQs are locked.
---
v4: New patch [1/6]
Kirill Tkhai (6):
sched/fair: Fix reschedule which is generated on throttled cfs_rq
sched: Wrapper for checking task_struct::on_rq
sched: Teach scheduler to understand ONRQ_MIGRATING state
sched: Remove double_rq_lock() from __migrate_task()
sched/fair: Remove double_lock_balance() from active_load_balance_cpu_stop()
sched/fair: Remove double_lock_balance() from load_balance()
kernel/sched/core.c | 115 +++++++++++++++++-------------
kernel/sched/deadline.c | 14 ++--
kernel/sched/fair.c | 174 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
kernel/sched/rt.c | 16 ++--
kernel/sched/sched.h | 13 +++
kernel/sched/stop_task.c | 2 -
6 files changed, 212 insertions(+), 122 deletions(-)
--
Signed-off-by: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@parallels.com>
reply other threads:[~2014-08-06 8:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=1407312354.8424.34.camel@tkhai \
--to=ktkhai@parallels.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=nicolas.pitre@linaro.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=tkhai@yandex.ru \
--cc=umgwanakikbuti@gmail.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