From: Martin Roehricht <ml@felicis.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Scheduling the highest priority task
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2007 23:05:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46B2471C.5060801@felicis.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070802194825.GA23245@elte.hu>
On 02.08.2007 21:48, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Martin Roehricht <ml@felicis.org> wrote:
>
>> On 08/02/2007 05:19 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> >* Martin Roehricht <ml@felicis.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >>That's fine with me, that within the same priority-queue any task can
>> >>be chosen. But assume two tasks with highly different priorities, such
>> >>as 105 and 135 are scheduled on the same processor and one of them is
>> >>now to be migrated -- shouldn't be the queue with task P=105
>> >>considered first for migration by this code? Both tasks would use
>> >>different queues with their own linked lists, right?
>> >
>> >yes. What makes you believe that the lower priority one (prio 135) is
>> >chosen? [ as i said before, that will only be chosen if all tasks in the
>> >higher-priority queue (prio 105) are either already running on a CPU or
>> >have recently run so that the cache-hot logic skips them. ]
>>
>> This believe is primarily based on my observations of multiple
>> benchmark runs and also on your statement earlier: »in the SMP
>> migration code, the 'old scheduler' indeed picks the lowest priority
>> one«.
>
> oh, sorry, that was meant to be the 'highest priority one' :-/
>
> so i think you got it all right, i just typoed that first sentence.
Okay, now I think I understood this part of the code correctly. The
reason why I observe a continous migration of the _lower_ priority tasks
is most probably due to the fact that the higher priority one is
currently running, according to:
can_migrate_task() in move_tasks(), and therein:
if (task_running(rq, p))
return 0;
I tracked down via an extended /proc/schedstats that my tasks fall
frequently into this pitfall. I basically solved it by making use of the
more active push-strategy which is called later by load_balance() once
the move_tasks() function did not succeed. So in case I need the higher
priority tasks, I return immediately from move_tasks().
Thanks for your help,
Martin
prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-08-02 21:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <8KLFD-G9-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
2007-07-25 15:18 ` highest and lowest priority job of a runqueue Martin Roehricht
2007-08-02 8:58 ` Scheduling the highest priority task Martin Roehricht
2007-08-02 11:40 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-02 15:00 ` Martin Roehricht
2007-08-02 15:03 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-02 15:14 ` Martin Roehricht
2007-08-02 15:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-02 15:46 ` Martin Roehricht
2007-08-02 19:48 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-02 21:05 ` Martin Roehricht [this message]
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=46B2471C.5060801@felicis.org \
--to=ml@felicis.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/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