From: Mike Kravetz <kravetz@us.ibm.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RT scheduling: wakeup bug?
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 15:15:19 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071001221519.GA20671@monkey.ibm.com> (raw)
I've been trying to track down some unexpected realtime latencies and
believe one source is a bug in the wakeup code. Specifically, this is
within the try_to_wake_up() routine. Within this routine there is the
following code segment:
/*
* If a newly woken up RT task cannot preempt the
* current (RT) task (on a target runqueue) then try
* to find another CPU it can preempt:
*/
if (rt_task(p) && !TASK_PREEMPTS_CURR(p, rq)) {
struct rq *this_rq = cpu_rq(this_cpu);
/*
* Special-case: the task on this CPU can be
* preempted. In that case there's no need to
* trigger reschedules on other CPUs, we can
* mark the current task for reschedule.
*
* (Note that it's safe to access this_rq without
* extra locking in this particular case, because
* we are on the current CPU.)
*/
if (TASK_PREEMPTS_CURR(p, this_rq))
set_tsk_need_resched(this_rq->curr);
else
/*
* Neither the intended target runqueue
* nor the current CPU can take this task.
* Trigger a reschedule on all other CPUs
* nevertheless, maybe one of them can take
* this task:
*/
smp_send_reschedule_allbutself_cpumask(p->cpus_allowed);
schedstat_inc(this_rq, rto_wakeup);
}
This logic seems appropriate. But, the task 'p' is most likely not on
the runqueue when sending the IPI. It gets added to the runqueue a
little later in the routine. As a result, the 'rt_overload' global may
not be set (based on the count of RT tasks on the runqueue) and other
CPUs may 'pass over' the runqueue when doing RT load balancing.
My observations/debugging/conclusions are based on an earlier version
of the code. It appears the same code/issue still exists in the most
version. But, I have not not done any work with the latest version.
--
Mike
next reply other threads:[~2007-10-01 22:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-01 22:15 Mike Kravetz [this message]
2007-10-02 5:06 ` -rt scheduling: wakeup bug? Ingo Molnar
2007-10-02 19:30 ` Mike Kravetz
2007-10-02 19:37 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-10-03 17:37 ` Mike Kravetz
2007-10-04 8:02 ` Ingo Molnar
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=20071001221519.GA20671@monkey.ibm.com \
--to=kravetz@us.ibm.com \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox