From: Xunlei Pang <xlpang@126.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@gmail.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Dan Streetman <ddstreet@ieee.org>,
Xunlei Pang <pang.xunlei@linaro.org>
Subject: [PATCH v4 2/3] sched/rt: Fix wrong SMP scheduler behavior for equal prio cases
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 17:32:23 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1424079144-5194-2-git-send-email-xlpang@126.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1424079144-5194-1-git-send-email-xlpang@126.com>
From: Xunlei Pang <pang.xunlei@linaro.org>
Currently, SMP RT scheduler has some trouble in dealing with
equal prio cases.
For example, in check_preempt_equal_prio():
When RT1(current task) gets preempted by RT2, if there is a
migratable RT3 with same prio, RT3 will be pushed away instead
of RT1 afterwards, because RT1 will be enqueued to the tail of
the pushable list when going through succeeding put_prev_task_rt()
triggered by resched. This broke FIFO.
Furthermore, this is also problematic for normal preempted cases
if there're some rt tasks queued with the same prio as current,
because current will be put behind these tasks in the pushable
queue.
So, if a task is running and gets preempted by a higher priority
task (or even with same priority for migrating), this patch ensures
that it is put before any existing task with the same priority in
the pushable queue.
Signed-off-by: Xunlei Pang <pang.xunlei@linaro.org>
---
kernel/sched/rt.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++-------
1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/rt.c b/kernel/sched/rt.c
index f4d4b07..65de40e 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/rt.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/rt.c
@@ -347,11 +347,15 @@ static inline void set_post_schedule(struct rq *rq)
rq->post_schedule = has_pushable_tasks(rq);
}
-static void enqueue_pushable_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
+static void enqueue_pushable_task(struct rq *rq,
+ struct task_struct *p, bool head)
{
plist_del(&p->pushable_tasks, &rq->rt.pushable_tasks);
plist_node_init(&p->pushable_tasks, p->prio);
- plist_add(&p->pushable_tasks, &rq->rt.pushable_tasks);
+ if (head)
+ plist_add_head(&p->pushable_tasks, &rq->rt.pushable_tasks);
+ else
+ plist_add_tail(&p->pushable_tasks, &rq->rt.pushable_tasks);
/* Update the highest prio pushable task */
if (p->prio < rq->rt.highest_prio.next)
@@ -373,7 +377,8 @@ static void dequeue_pushable_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
#else
-static inline void enqueue_pushable_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
+static inline void enqueue_pushable_task(struct rq *rq,
+ struct task_struct *p, bool head)
{
}
@@ -1248,7 +1253,7 @@ enqueue_task_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)
enqueue_rt_entity(rt_se, flags & ENQUEUE_HEAD);
if (!task_current(rq, p) && p->nr_cpus_allowed > 1)
- enqueue_pushable_task(rq, p);
+ enqueue_pushable_task(rq, p, 0);
}
static void dequeue_task_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)
@@ -1494,8 +1499,12 @@ static void put_prev_task_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
* The previous task needs to be made eligible for pushing
* if it is still active
*/
- if (on_rt_rq(&p->rt) && p->nr_cpus_allowed > 1)
- enqueue_pushable_task(rq, p);
+ if (on_rt_rq(&p->rt) && p->nr_cpus_allowed > 1) {
+ if (task_running(rq, p) && (preempt_count() & PREEMPT_ACTIVE))
+ enqueue_pushable_task(rq, p, 1);
+ else
+ enqueue_pushable_task(rq, p, 0);
+ }
}
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
@@ -1914,7 +1923,7 @@ static void set_cpus_allowed_rt(struct task_struct *p,
rq->rt.rt_nr_migratory--;
} else {
if (!task_current(rq, p))
- enqueue_pushable_task(rq, p);
+ enqueue_pushable_task(rq, p, 0);
rq->rt.rt_nr_migratory++;
}
--
1.9.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-16 9:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-16 9:32 [PATCH v4 1/3] lib/plist: Provide plist_add_head() for nodes with the same prio Xunlei Pang
2015-02-16 9:32 ` Xunlei Pang [this message]
2015-02-16 15:35 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] sched/rt: Fix wrong SMP scheduler behavior for equal prio cases Steven Rostedt
2015-02-16 9:32 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] sched/rt: Check to push the task when changing its affinity Xunlei Pang
2015-02-16 15:32 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] lib/plist: Provide plist_add_head() for nodes with the same prio Steven Rostedt
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=1424079144-5194-2-git-send-email-xlpang@126.com \
--to=xlpang@126.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ddstreet@ieee.org \
--cc=juri.lelli@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pang.xunlei@linaro.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
/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®