From: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Andrew Theurer <habanero@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, chegu vinod <chegu_vinod@hp.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, X86 <x86@kernel.org>,
Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <srivatsa.vaddagiri@gmail.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Improving directed yield scalability for PLE handler
Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2012 14:13:45 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120908084345.GU30238@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1347046931.7332.51.camel@oc2024037011.ibm.com>
>
> signed-off-by: Andrew Theurer <habanero@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index fbf1fd0..c767915 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -4844,6 +4844,9 @@ bool __sched yield_to(struct task_struct *p, bool
> preempt)
>
> again:
> p_rq = task_rq(p);
> + if (task_running(p_rq, p) || p->state || !(p_rq->curr->flags &
> PF_VCPU)) {
> + goto out_no_unlock;
> + }
> double_rq_lock(rq, p_rq);
> while (task_rq(p) != p_rq) {
> double_rq_unlock(rq, p_rq);
> @@ -4856,8 +4859,6 @@ again:
> if (curr->sched_class != p->sched_class)
> goto out;
>
> - if (task_running(p_rq, p) || p->state)
> - goto out;
Is it possible that by this time the current thread takes double rq
lock, thread p could actually be running? i.e is there merit to keep
this check around even with your similar check above?
>
> yielded = curr->sched_class->yield_to_task(rq, p, preempt);
> if (yielded) {
> @@ -4879,6 +4880,7 @@ again:
>
> out:
> double_rq_unlock(rq, p_rq);
> +out_no_unlock:
> local_irq_restore(flags);
>
> if (yielded)
>
>
--
thanks and regards
Srikar
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-08 8:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-18 13:37 [PATCH RFC V5 0/3] kvm: Improving directed yield in PLE handler Raghavendra K T
2012-07-18 13:37 ` [PATCH RFC V5 1/3] kvm/config: Add config to support ple or cpu relax optimzation Raghavendra K T
2012-07-18 13:37 ` [PATCH RFC V5 2/3] kvm: Note down when cpu relax intercepted or pause loop exited Raghavendra K T
2012-07-18 13:38 ` [PATCH RFC V5 3/3] kvm: Choose better candidate for directed yield Raghavendra K T
2012-07-18 14:39 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-07-19 9:47 ` [RESEND PATCH " Raghavendra K T
2012-07-20 17:36 ` [PATCH RFC V5 0/3] kvm: Improving directed yield in PLE handler Marcelo Tosatti
2012-07-22 12:34 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-07-22 12:43 ` Avi Kivity
2012-07-23 7:35 ` Christian Borntraeger
2012-07-22 17:58 ` Rik van Riel
2012-07-23 10:03 ` Avi Kivity
2012-09-07 13:11 ` [RFC][PATCH] Improving directed yield scalability for " Andrew Theurer
2012-09-07 18:06 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-09-07 19:42 ` Andrew Theurer
2012-09-08 8:43 ` Srikar Dronamraju [this message]
2012-09-10 13:16 ` Andrew Theurer
2012-09-10 16:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-09-10 16:56 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2012-09-10 17:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-09-10 19:10 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-09-10 20:12 ` Andrew Theurer
2012-09-10 20:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-09-10 20:31 ` Rik van Riel
2012-09-11 6:08 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-09-11 12:48 ` Andrew Theurer
2012-09-11 18:27 ` Andrew Theurer
2012-09-13 11:48 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-09-13 21:30 ` Andrew Theurer
2012-09-14 17:10 ` Andrew Jones
2012-09-15 16:08 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-09-17 13:48 ` Andrew Jones
2012-09-14 20:34 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-09-17 8:02 ` Andrew Jones
2012-09-16 8:55 ` Avi Kivity
2012-09-17 8:10 ` Andrew Jones
2012-09-18 3:03 ` Andrew Theurer
2012-09-19 13:39 ` Avi Kivity
2012-09-13 12:13 ` Avi Kivity
2012-09-11 7:04 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2012-09-10 14:43 ` Raghavendra K T
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=20120908084345.GU30238@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=chegu_vinod@hp.com \
--cc=gleb@redhat.com \
--cc=habanero@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=srivatsa.vaddagiri@gmail.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.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).