From: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.jf.intel.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.jf.intel.com>,
Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [patch v2 1/2] sched: check for prev_cpu == this_cpu before calling wake_affine()
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 10:03:00 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1271782980.2871.6.camel@sbs-t61.sc.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1271753706.1676.402.camel@laptop>
On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 01:55 -0700, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 10:46 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > So should we be using idle_cpu(i) instead?
>
> something like the below..
Looks good to me.
Acked-by: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
>
> ---
> Index: linux-2.6/kernel/sched_fair.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/sched_fair.c
> +++ linux-2.6/kernel/sched_fair.c
> @@ -1375,26 +1375,25 @@ find_idlest_cpu(struct sched_group *grou
> /*
> * Try and locate an idle CPU in the sched_domain.
> */
> -static int
> -select_idle_sibling(struct task_struct *p, int target)
> +static int select_idle_sibling(struct task_struct *p, int target)
> {
> int cpu = smp_processor_id();
> int prev_cpu = task_cpu(p);
> - int i;
> struct sched_domain *sd;
> + int i;
>
> /*
> * If the task is going to be woken-up on this cpu and if it is
> * already idle, then it is the right target.
> */
> - if (target == cpu && !cpu_rq(cpu)->cfs.nr_running)
> + if (target == cpu && idle_cpu(cpu))
> return cpu;
>
> /*
> * If the task is going to be woken-up on the cpu where it previously
> * ran and if it is currently idle, then it the right target.
> */
> - if (target == prev_cpu && !cpu_rq(prev_cpu)->cfs.nr_running)
> + if (target == prev_cpu && idle_cpu(prev_cpu))
> return prev_cpu;
>
> /*
> @@ -1405,7 +1404,7 @@ select_idle_sibling(struct task_struct *
> break;
>
> for_each_cpu_and(i, sched_domain_span(sd), &p->cpus_allowed) {
> - if (!cpu_rq(i)->cfs.nr_running) {
> + if (idle_cpu(i)) {
> target = i;
> break;
> }
> @@ -1479,16 +1478,14 @@ select_task_rq_fair(struct rq *rq, struc
> want_sd = 0;
> }
>
> - if (want_affine) {
> - /*
> - * If both cpu and prev_cpu are part of this domain,
> - * cpu is a valid SD_WAKE_AFFINE target.
> - */
> - if (cpumask_test_cpu(prev_cpu, sched_domain_span(tmp))
> - && (tmp->flags & SD_WAKE_AFFINE)) {
> - affine_sd = tmp;
> - want_affine = 0;
> - }
> + /*
> + * If both cpu and prev_cpu are part of this domain,
> + * cpu is a valid SD_WAKE_AFFINE target.
> + */
> + if (want_affine && (tmp->flags & SD_WAKE_AFFINE) &&
> + cpumask_test_cpu(prev_cpu, sched_domain_span(tmp))) {
> + affine_sd = tmp;
> + want_affine = 0;
> }
>
> if (!want_sd && !want_affine)
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-20 17:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-08 22:19 Suresh Siddha
2010-03-08 22:19 ` [patch v2 2/2] sched: fix select_idle_sibling() logic in select_task_rq_fair() Suresh Siddha
2010-03-31 10:25 ` [patch v2 1/2] sched: check for prev_cpu == this_cpu before calling wake_affine() Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-31 23:47 ` Suresh Siddha
2010-04-01 5:32 ` Mike Galbraith
2010-04-01 21:04 ` Suresh Siddha
2010-04-02 6:20 ` Mike Galbraith
2010-04-02 17:05 ` Suresh Siddha
2010-04-02 19:43 ` Mike Galbraith
2010-04-14 20:45 ` Suresh Siddha
2010-04-15 5:17 ` Mike Galbraith
2010-04-20 8:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-20 8:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-20 17:03 ` Suresh Siddha [this message]
2010-04-23 10:50 ` [tip:sched/core] sched: Fix select_idle_sibling() logic in select_task_rq_fair() tip-bot for Suresh Siddha
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=1271782980.2871.6.camel@sbs-t61.sc.intel.com \
--to=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
--cc=arjan@linux.jf.intel.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=yanmin_zhang@linux.jf.intel.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®