From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965813AbeBMUc6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Feb 2018 15:32:58 -0500 Received: from mail-pg0-f65.google.com ([74.125.83.65]:34889 "EHLO mail-pg0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965790AbeBMUcz (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Feb 2018 15:32:55 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x227I9/5g80iDAi2P+mMKYRm71Whvo22VMoVUgL/GiEq3J0bBWfUgEb5eHQvkAmXF6ppNxuWwhw== From: Mathieu Poirier To: peterz@infradead.org Cc: lizefan@huawei.com, mingo@redhat.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, claudio@evidence.eu.com, bristot@redhat.com, tommaso.cucinotta@santannapisa.it, juri.lelli@redhat.com, luca.abeni@santannapisa.it, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH V3 03/10] sched/core: Streamlining calls to task_rq_unlock() Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 13:32:40 -0700 Message-Id: <1518553967-20656-4-git-send-email-mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.7.4 In-Reply-To: <1518553967-20656-1-git-send-email-mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> References: <1518553967-20656-1-git-send-email-mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Calls to task_rq_unlock() are done several times in function __sched_setscheduler(). This is fine when only the rq lock needs to be handled but not so much when other locks come into play. This patch streamline the release of the rq lock so that only one location need to be modified when dealing with more than one lock. No change of functionality is introduced by this patch. Signed-off-by: Mathieu Poirier --- kernel/sched/core.c | 24 ++++++++++++++---------- 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c index bf724c1952ea..f727c3d0064c 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/core.c +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c @@ -4189,8 +4189,8 @@ static int __sched_setscheduler(struct task_struct *p, * Changing the policy of the stop threads its a very bad idea: */ if (p == rq->stop) { - task_rq_unlock(rq, p, &rf); - return -EINVAL; + retval = -EINVAL; + goto unlock; } /* @@ -4206,8 +4206,8 @@ static int __sched_setscheduler(struct task_struct *p, goto change; p->sched_reset_on_fork = reset_on_fork; - task_rq_unlock(rq, p, &rf); - return 0; + retval = 0; + goto unlock; } change: @@ -4220,8 +4220,8 @@ static int __sched_setscheduler(struct task_struct *p, if (rt_bandwidth_enabled() && rt_policy(policy) && task_group(p)->rt_bandwidth.rt_runtime == 0 && !task_group_is_autogroup(task_group(p))) { - task_rq_unlock(rq, p, &rf); - return -EPERM; + retval = -EPERM; + goto unlock; } #endif #ifdef CONFIG_SMP @@ -4236,8 +4236,8 @@ static int __sched_setscheduler(struct task_struct *p, */ if (!cpumask_subset(span, &p->cpus_allowed) || rq->rd->dl_bw.bw == 0) { - task_rq_unlock(rq, p, &rf); - return -EPERM; + retval = -EPERM; + goto unlock; } } #endif @@ -4256,8 +4256,8 @@ static int __sched_setscheduler(struct task_struct *p, * is available. */ if ((dl_policy(policy) || dl_task(p)) && sched_dl_overflow(p, policy, attr)) { - task_rq_unlock(rq, p, &rf); - return -EBUSY; + retval = -EBUSY; + goto unlock; } p->sched_reset_on_fork = reset_on_fork; @@ -4313,6 +4313,10 @@ static int __sched_setscheduler(struct task_struct *p, preempt_enable(); return 0; + +unlock: + task_rq_unlock(rq, p, &rf); + return retval; } static int _sched_setscheduler(struct task_struct *p, int policy, -- 2.7.4