linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au,
	sivanich@sgi.com, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com,
	torvalds@linux-foundation.org, mingo@elte.hu,
	peterz@infradead.org, dipankar@in.ibm.com, josh@freedesktop.org,
	paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] cpuhog: implement cpuhog
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 20:01:42 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100308190142.GA9149@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1268063603-7425-2-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org>

On 03/09, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> Implement a simplistic per-cpu maximum priority cpu hogging mechanism
> named cpuhog.  A callback can be scheduled to run on one or multiple
> cpus with maximum priority monopolozing those cpus.  This is primarily
> to replace and unify RT workqueue usage in stop_machine and scheduler
> migration_thread which currently is serving multiple purposes.
>
> Four functions are provided - hog_one_cpu(), hog_one_cpu_nowait(),
> hog_cpus() and try_hog_cpus().
>
> This is to allow clean sharing of resources among stop_cpu and all the
> migration thread users.  One cpuhog thread per cpu is created which is
> currently named "hog/CPU".  This will eventually replace the migration
> thread and take on its name.

Heh. In no way I can ack (or even review) the changes in sched.c, but
personally I like this idea.

And I think cpuhog can have more users. Say, wait_task_context_switch()
could use hog_one_cpu() to force the context switch instead of looping,
perhaps.

A simple question,

> +struct cpuhog_done {
> +	atomic_t		nr_todo;	/* nr left to execute */
> +	bool			executed;	/* actually executed? */
> +	int			ret;		/* collected return value */
> +	struct completion	completion;	/* fired if nr_todo reaches 0 */
> +};
> +
> +static void cpuhog_signal_done(struct cpuhog_done *done, bool executed)
> +{
> +	if (done) {
> +		if (executed)
> +			done->executed = true;
> +		if (atomic_dec_and_test(&done->nr_todo))
> +			complete(&done->completion);
> +	}
> +}

So, ->executed becomes T if at least one cpuhog_thread() thread calls ->fn(),

> +int __hog_cpus(const struct cpumask *cpumask, cpuhog_fn_t fn, void *arg)
> +{
> ...
> +
> +	wait_for_completion(&done.completion);
> +	return done.executed ? done.ret : -ENOENT;
> +}

Is this really right?

I mean, perhaps it makes more sense if ->executed was set only if _all_
CPUs from cpumask "ack" this call?


I guess, currently this doesn't matter, stop_machine() uses cpu_online_mask
and we can't race with hotplug.

Oleg.


  reply	other threads:[~2010-03-08 19:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-03-08 15:53 [PATCHSET] cpuhog: implement and use cpuhog Tejun Heo
2010-03-08 15:53 ` [PATCH 1/4] cpuhog: implement cpuhog Tejun Heo
2010-03-08 19:01   ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2010-03-08 23:18     ` Tejun Heo
2010-03-08 15:53 ` [PATCH 2/4] stop_machine: reimplement using cpuhog Tejun Heo
2010-03-08 16:32   ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-03-08 23:21     ` Tejun Heo
2010-03-08 17:10   ` Heiko Carstens
2010-03-08 18:27     ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-08 19:37       ` Heiko Carstens
2010-03-08 23:39         ` Tejun Heo
2010-03-09  7:09           ` Heiko Carstens
2010-03-09  7:16             ` Tejun Heo
2010-03-08 19:06   ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-08 23:22     ` Tejun Heo
2010-03-08 15:53 ` [PATCH 3/4] scheduler: replace migration_thread with cpuhog Tejun Heo
2010-03-08 15:53 ` [PATCH 4/4] scheduler: kill paranoia check in synchronize_sched_expedited() Tejun Heo
2010-03-10 19:25 ` [PATCHSET] cpuhog: implement and use cpuhog Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-12  3:13   ` Tejun Heo
2010-03-29  6:46     ` Rusty Russell
2010-03-29  9:11     ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-02  5:45       ` Tejun Heo
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-03-17  8:40 [PATCHSET sched/core] cpuhog: implement and use cpuhog, take#2 Tejun Heo
2010-03-17  8:40 ` [PATCH 1/4] cpuhog: implement cpuhog Tejun Heo

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=20100308190142.GA9149@redhat.com \
    --to=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=josh@freedesktop.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --cc=sivanich@sgi.com \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).