From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1756103AbbE2OQc (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 29 May 2015 10:16:32 -0400
Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:37089 "EHLO
	casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752097AbbE2OQY (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 29 May 2015 10:16:24 -0400
Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 16:16:14 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] sched/deadline: reschedule if stop task slip in
 after pull operations
Message-ID: <20150529141614.GQ3644@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1431496867-4194-1-git-send-email-wanpeng.li@linux.intel.com>
 <1431496867-4194-4-git-send-email-wanpeng.li@linux.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1431496867-4194-4-git-send-email-wanpeng.li@linux.intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 02:01:04PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> pull_dl_task can drop (and re-acquire) rq->lock, this means a stop task
> can slip in, in which case we need to reschedule. This patch add the
> reschedule when the scenario occurs.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/deadline.c | 16 +++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> index e49b1e6..7d4c4fc 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> @@ -1750,7 +1750,13 @@ static void switched_from_dl(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
>  	if (!task_on_rq_queued(p) || rq->dl.dl_nr_running)
>  		return;
>  
> -	if (pull_dl_task(rq))
> +	/*
> +	 * pull_dl_task() can drop (and re-acquire) rq->lock; this
> +	 * means a stop task can slip in, in which case we need to
> +	 * reschedule.
> +	 */
> +	if (pull_dl_task(rq) ||
> +		(rq->stop && task_on_rq_queued(rq->stop)))
>  		resched_curr(rq);

But, the waking of the stop task will already have done the preemption
check and won (obviously). So the wakeup should already have done the
resched_curr().

So why?