public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@unitn.it>
To: Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] sched/deadline: fix earliest_dl.next logic
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 12:15:02 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56602436.5090104@unitn.it> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1449135730-27202-1-git-send-email-wanpeng.li@hotmail.com>

On 12/03/2015 10:42 AM, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> earliest_dl.next should cache deadline of the earliest ready task that
> is also enqueued in the pushable rbtree, as pull algorithm uses this
> information to find candidates for migration: if the earliest_dl.next
> deadline of source rq is earlier than the earliest_dl.curr deadline of
> destination rq, the task from the source rq can be pulled.
>
> However, current implementation only guarantees that earliest_dl.next is
> the deadline of the next ready task instead of the next pushable task;
> which will result in potentially holding both rqs' lock and find nothing
> to migrate because of affinity constraints. In addition, current logic
> doesn't update the next candidate for pushing in pick_next_task_dl(),
> even if the running task is never eligible.
>
> This patch fixes both problems by updating earliest_dl.next when
> pushable dl task is enqueued/dequeued, similar to what we already do for
> RT.
I just re-ran some tests with this version of the patch, and
it still looks ok.


			Luca


>
> Tested-by: Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@unitn.it>
> Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@hotmail.com>
> ---
> v5 -> v6:
>   * take advantage of next_node
> v4 -> v5:
>   * remove useless pick_next_earliest_dl_task declare
> v3 -> v4:
>   * move earliest_dl.next caculation under if (leftmost)
>   * don't reset dl_rq->earliest_dl.next
>   * just checking and eventually using the updated leftmost in
>     dequeue_pushable_dl_task()
> v2 -> v3:
>   * reset dl_rq->earliest_dl.next to 0 if !next_pushable
> v1 -> v2:
>   * fix potential NULL pointer dereference
>
>   kernel/sched/deadline.c | 58 +++++--------------------------------------------
>   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> index 8b0a15e..a35e24a 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> @@ -176,8 +176,10 @@ static void enqueue_pushable_dl_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
>   		}
>   	}
>
> -	if (leftmost)
> +	if (leftmost) {
>   		dl_rq->pushable_dl_tasks_leftmost = &p->pushable_dl_tasks;
> +		dl_rq->earliest_dl.next = p->dl.deadline;
> +	}
>
>   	rb_link_node(&p->pushable_dl_tasks, parent, link);
>   	rb_insert_color(&p->pushable_dl_tasks, &dl_rq->pushable_dl_tasks_root);
> @@ -195,6 +197,9 @@ static void dequeue_pushable_dl_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
>
>   		next_node = rb_next(&p->pushable_dl_tasks);
>   		dl_rq->pushable_dl_tasks_leftmost = next_node;
> +		if (next_node)
> +			dl_rq->earliest_dl.next = rb_entry(next_node,
> +				struct task_struct, pushable_dl_tasks)->dl.deadline;
>   	}
>
>   	rb_erase(&p->pushable_dl_tasks, &dl_rq->pushable_dl_tasks_root);
> @@ -782,42 +787,14 @@ static void update_curr_dl(struct rq *rq)
>
>   #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
>
> -static struct task_struct *pick_next_earliest_dl_task(struct rq *rq, int cpu);
> -
> -static inline u64 next_deadline(struct rq *rq)
> -{
> -	struct task_struct *next = pick_next_earliest_dl_task(rq, rq->cpu);
> -
> -	if (next && dl_prio(next->prio))
> -		return next->dl.deadline;
> -	else
> -		return 0;
> -}
> -
>   static void inc_dl_deadline(struct dl_rq *dl_rq, u64 deadline)
>   {
>   	struct rq *rq = rq_of_dl_rq(dl_rq);
>
>   	if (dl_rq->earliest_dl.curr == 0 ||
>   	    dl_time_before(deadline, dl_rq->earliest_dl.curr)) {
> -		/*
> -		 * If the dl_rq had no -deadline tasks, or if the new task
> -		 * has shorter deadline than the current one on dl_rq, we
> -		 * know that the previous earliest becomes our next earliest,
> -		 * as the new task becomes the earliest itself.
> -		 */
> -		dl_rq->earliest_dl.next = dl_rq->earliest_dl.curr;
>   		dl_rq->earliest_dl.curr = deadline;
>   		cpudl_set(&rq->rd->cpudl, rq->cpu, deadline, 1);
> -	} else if (dl_rq->earliest_dl.next == 0 ||
> -		   dl_time_before(deadline, dl_rq->earliest_dl.next)) {
> -		/*
> -		 * On the other hand, if the new -deadline task has a
> -		 * a later deadline than the earliest one on dl_rq, but
> -		 * it is earlier than the next (if any), we must
> -		 * recompute the next-earliest.
> -		 */
> -		dl_rq->earliest_dl.next = next_deadline(rq);
>   	}
>   }
>
> @@ -839,7 +816,6 @@ static void dec_dl_deadline(struct dl_rq *dl_rq, u64 deadline)
>
>   		entry = rb_entry(leftmost, struct sched_dl_entity, rb_node);
>   		dl_rq->earliest_dl.curr = entry->deadline;
> -		dl_rq->earliest_dl.next = next_deadline(rq);
>   		cpudl_set(&rq->rd->cpudl, rq->cpu, entry->deadline, 1);
>   	}
>   }
> @@ -1274,28 +1250,6 @@ static int pick_dl_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int cpu)
>   	return 0;
>   }
>
> -/* Returns the second earliest -deadline task, NULL otherwise */
> -static struct task_struct *pick_next_earliest_dl_task(struct rq *rq, int cpu)
> -{
> -	struct rb_node *next_node = rq->dl.rb_leftmost;
> -	struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se;
> -	struct task_struct *p = NULL;
> -
> -next_node:
> -	next_node = rb_next(next_node);
> -	if (next_node) {
> -		dl_se = rb_entry(next_node, struct sched_dl_entity, rb_node);
> -		p = dl_task_of(dl_se);
> -
> -		if (pick_dl_task(rq, p, cpu))
> -			return p;
> -
> -		goto next_node;
> -	}
> -
> -	return NULL;
> -}
> -
>   /*
>    * Return the earliest pushable rq's task, which is suitable to be executed
>    * on the CPU, NULL otherwise:
>


  reply	other threads:[~2015-12-03 11:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-03  9:42 [PATCH v6] sched/deadline: fix earliest_dl.next logic Wanpeng Li
2015-12-03 11:15 ` Luca Abeni [this message]
2015-12-04  9:59 ` Juri Lelli
2015-12-04 10:11   ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-12-28  9:40 ` Wanpeng Li
2016-01-06 18:48 ` [tip:sched/core] sched/deadline: Fix the " tip-bot for Wanpeng Li

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=56602436.5090104@unitn.it \
    --to=luca.abeni@unitn.it \
    --cc=juri.lelli@arm.com \
    --cc=kernellwp@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=wanpeng.li@hotmail.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