From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Martin Roehricht <ml@felicis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Scheduling the highest priority task
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 13:40:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070802114012.GA4067@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46B19CA1.7050204@felicis.org>
* Martin Roehricht <ml@felicis.org> wrote:
> perhaps someone can give me a hint what I should consider to look for in
> order to change the ("old" 2.6.21) scheduler such that it schedules the
> highest priority task of a given runqueue.
> Given a multiprocessor system I currently observe that whenever there
> are two tasks on one CPU, the lower priority one is migrated to another
> CPU. But I don't realize why this happens. From looking at the source
> code I thought it should be the highest priority one (lowest bit set in
> the runqueue's bitmap) according to
> idx = sched_find_first_bit(array->bitmap);
> within move_tasks(). The idx value is then used as an index (surprise)
> to the linked list of tasks of this particular priority and one task is
> picked:
> head = array->queue + idx;
> curr = head->prev;
> tmp = list_entry(curr, struct task_struct, run_list);
>
> Can anybody confirm that my observations are correct that the
> scheduler picks the lowest priority job of a runqueue for migration?
> What needs to be changed in order to pick the highest priority one?
in the SMP migration code, the 'old scheduler' indeed picks the lowest
priority one, _except_ if that task is running on another CPU or is too
'cache hot':
if (skip_for_load ||
!can_migrate_task(tmp, busiest, this_cpu, sd, idle, &pinned)) {
also, from the priority-queue at 'idx', we pick head->prev, i.e. we
process the list in the opposite order as schedule(). (This got changed
in CFS to process in the same direction - which is more logical and also
yield the most cache-cold tasks for migration.)
i hope this helps.
> Is my assumption wrong? Using printk()s within this code section makes
> the system just hang completely quite soon. The schedstats do not
> notify me immediately. So I am a bit lost on how to track down or
> trace the problem.
yep, printk locks up. You can use my static tracer:
http://people.redhat.com/mingo/latency-tracing-patches/
add explicit static tracepoints to the scheduler code you want to
instrument via trace_special(x,y,z) calls [with parameters that interest
you most], and you can read out the trace via:
http://people.redhat.com/mingo/latency-tracing-patches/trace-it.c
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-08-02 11:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <8KLFD-G9-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
2007-07-25 15:18 ` highest and lowest priority job of a runqueue Martin Roehricht
2007-08-02 8:58 ` Scheduling the highest priority task Martin Roehricht
2007-08-02 11:40 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2007-08-02 15:00 ` Martin Roehricht
2007-08-02 15:03 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-02 15:14 ` Martin Roehricht
2007-08-02 15:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-02 15:46 ` Martin Roehricht
2007-08-02 19:48 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-02 21:05 ` Martin Roehricht
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=20070802114012.GA4067@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ml@felicis.org \
/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