From: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [bug report] sched/fair: Prefer prev cpu in asymmetric wakeup path
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:56:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201113085637.GA31601@vingu-book> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201113084657.GA86197@mwanda>
Hi Dan,
Le vendredi 13 nov. 2020 à 11:46:57 (+0300), Dan Carpenter a écrit :
> Hello Vincent Guittot,
>
> The patch b4c9c9f15649: "sched/fair: Prefer prev cpu in asymmetric
> wakeup path" from Oct 29, 2020, leads to the following static checker
> warning:
>
> kernel/sched/fair.c:6249 select_idle_sibling()
> error: uninitialized symbol 'task_util'.
>
> kernel/sched/fair.c
> 6233 static int select_idle_sibling(struct task_struct *p, int prev, int target)
> 6234 {
> 6235 struct sched_domain *sd;
> 6236 unsigned long task_util;
> 6237 int i, recent_used_cpu;
> 6238
> 6239 /*
> 6240 * On asymmetric system, update task utilization because we will check
> 6241 * that the task fits with cpu's capacity.
> 6242 */
>
> The original comment was a bit more clear... Perhaps "On asymmetric
> system[s], [record the] task utilization because we will check that the
> task [can be done within] the cpu's capacity."
The comment "update task utilization because we will check ..." refers to
sync_entity_load_avg()
>
> 6243 if (static_branch_unlikely(&sched_asym_cpucapacity)) {
> 6244 sync_entity_load_avg(&p->se);
> 6245 task_util = uclamp_task_util(p);
> 6246 }
>
> "task_util" is not initialized on the else path.
no need because it will not be used
>
> 6247
> 6248 if ((available_idle_cpu(target) || sched_idle_cpu(target)) &&
> 6249 asym_fits_capacity(task_util, target))
> ^^^^^^^^^
> Uninitialized variable warning.
asym_fits_capacity includes the same condition as above when we set task_util
so task_util can't be used unintialize
static inline bool asym_fits_capacity(int task_util, int cpu)
{
if (static_branch_unlikely(&sched_asym_cpucapacity))
return fits_capacity(task_util, capacity_of(cpu));
return true;
}
>
> 6250 return target;
> 6251
> 6252 /*
> 6253 * If the previous CPU is cache affine and idle, don't be stupid:
> 6254 */
> 6255 if (prev != target && cpus_share_cache(prev, target) &&
> 6256 (available_idle_cpu(prev) || sched_idle_cpu(prev)) &&
> 6257 asym_fits_capacity(task_util, prev))
> 6258 return prev;
> 6259
> 6260 /*
> 6261 * Allow a per-cpu kthread to stack with the wakee if the
>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-13 8:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-13 8:46 [bug report] sched/fair: Prefer prev cpu in asymmetric wakeup path Dan Carpenter
2020-11-13 8:56 ` Vincent Guittot [this message]
2020-11-13 11:49 ` Dan Carpenter
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=20201113085637.GA31601@vingu-book \
--to=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
/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