From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AAD7ECDFBB for ; Fri, 20 Jul 2018 12:53:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFF3120661 for ; Fri, 20 Jul 2018 12:53:36 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org EFF3120661 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2388300AbeGTNlm (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Jul 2018 09:41:42 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f67.google.com ([209.85.221.67]:33244 "EHLO mail-wr1-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731833AbeGTNll (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Jul 2018 09:41:41 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-f67.google.com with SMTP id g6-v6so11259615wrp.0 for ; Fri, 20 Jul 2018 05:53:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=hO9gjRcwiUHt7lNNOrFkiM04cvKbGj0Bp/sIbfZ5wU0=; b=oZpbYSfkI54ykqR7B1I9MQIJuZIOQGiGey6w252cjHLe6MYmx8Dq6m2TYM8cOJqn5V EL09IR9pN8zT4in/LGUkFaGYLE1O5kobuXwp2YhjWU3W7K8hLhPj7ILkYzdDtYKw/9fX WQj3yYbENmQzr3pGfuSMvtWqZmFz/IROxwGHQTTJ5ngTAmreadG/Qjgvm5fh5ARWzNyF M9olqnSzVjv38cEWGo8Su4AZHfC2BGEbfOvi1015AiVi3hOKQ0abfCswYLVB7ETkJ9LM sMVyuK8GhWv0pP6ptQu2UtZSqjyvZBQSuefm+b/hLE+d+D8RKmamgj+3blslMlVwZwwH lfNg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlF135YQNyHBKSXbDi9j7rJcmuLdNROWqZ5LpKJHhPAQa7zurKJl B3/sYE1qvgAqYF5WGzfSPiBm4g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpes0TToMc60XNNn6nZYK1/Gw4yxlGzug2tU8ecxEzXQ8ti120f7csEZyOsEkRXaUQSQirkWeQ== X-Received: by 2002:adf:fa45:: with SMTP id y5-v6mr1552008wrr.138.1532091212753; Fri, 20 Jul 2018 05:53:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([151.15.255.159]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t9-v6sm1889299wra.62.2018.07.20.05.53.31 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Fri, 20 Jul 2018 05:53:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 14:53:29 +0200 From: Juri Lelli To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Clark Williams , Luca Abeni , Tommaso Cucinotta , Steven Rostedt , Ingo Molnar , stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] sched/deadline: Update rq_clock of later_rq when pushing a task Message-ID: <20180720125329.GD3642@localhost.localdomain> References: <20180720124615.GM2476@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20180720124821.GB2512@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180720124821.GB2512@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 20/07/18 14:48, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 02:46:15PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 11:16:30AM +0200, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira wrote: > > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c > > > index fbfc3f1d368a..8b50eea4b607 100644 > > > --- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c > > > +++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c > > > @@ -2090,8 +2090,14 @@ static int push_dl_task(struct rq *rq) > > > sub_rq_bw(&next_task->dl, &rq->dl); > > > set_task_cpu(next_task, later_rq->cpu); > > > add_rq_bw(&next_task->dl, &later_rq->dl); > > > + > > > + /* > > > + * Update the later_rq clock here, because the clock is used > > > + * by the cpufreq_update_util() inside __add_running_bw(). > > > + */ > > > + update_rq_clock(later_rq); > > > add_running_bw(&next_task->dl, &later_rq->dl); > > > - activate_task(later_rq, next_task, 0); > > > + activate_task(later_rq, next_task, ENQUEUE_NOCLOCK); > > > ret = 1; > > > > > > resched_curr(later_rq); > > > > Why isn't push_rt_task() affected by the very same issue? > > Aah, I see, its the add_running_bw() think; for which RT doesn't have a > counter-part. Right, but doesn't enqueue_top_rt_rq end-up being called by activate_ task on lowest_rq? Mmm.