Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched: Move the sleeping while atomic checks early in cond_resched()

Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-10T15:12:23Z

On Fri, 2009-07-10 at 17:08 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 04:59:55PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, 2009-07-10 at 16:49 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >
> > > index 0cb0d8d..e357dc7 100644
> > > --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> > > @@ -2279,11 +2279,13 @@ extern int _cond_resched(void);
> > > #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_BKL
> > > static inline int cond_resched(void)
> > > {
> > > + might_sleep();
> > > return 0;
> > > }
> > > #else
> > > static inline int cond_resched(void)
> > > {
> > > + might_sleep();
> > > return _cond_resched();
> > > }
> > > #endif
> >
> > # define might_resched() _cond_resched()
>
>
> Argh, indeed.
> I thought might_sleep() only wrapped __might_sleep(__FILE__, __LINE__)
>
>
> > # define might_sleep() \
> > do { __might_sleep(__FILE__, __LINE__); might_resched(); } while (0)
> >
> >
> > Doesn't seem to make it any better that, but yeah, moving that
> > __might_sleep() did occur to me earlier today when I touched that code.
>
>
> Ok.
>
> Another idea: if cond_resched() was a macro and __might_sleep() was
> called inside, the given __FILE__ __LINE__ would be much more useful.
>
> Only the backtraces would be useful in the current state, __FILE__
> and __LINE__ point to sched.h, which is not exactly what is needed,
> right?

Right. There's some CONFIG_PREEMPT_BKL clutter in sched.h but I think we
could largely fold might_sleep() and cond_resched().

Ingo?