mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
To: kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Olivier Langlois <olivier@trillion01.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] sched: task_sched_runtime introduce micro optimization
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 16:27:45 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130618142744.GG17619@somewhere.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1369604149-13016-9-git-send-email-kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com>

On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 05:35:47PM -0400, kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com wrote:
> From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> 
> rq lock in task_sched_runtime() is necessary for two reasons. 1)
> accessing se.sum_exec_runtime is not atomic on 32bit and 2)
> do_task_delta_exec() require it.
> 
> So, 64bit can avoid holding rq lock when add_delta is false and
> delta_exec is 0.
> 
> Cc: Olivier Langlois <olivier@trillion01.com>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> Suggested-by: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>
> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/core.c |   15 +++++++++++++++
>  1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index 96512e9..0f859cc 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -2692,6 +2692,21 @@ unsigned long long task_sched_runtime(struct task_struct *p, bool add_delta)
>  	struct rq *rq;
>  	u64 ns = 0;
>  
> +#ifdef CONFIG_64BIT
> +	/*
> +	 * 64-bit doesn't need locks to atomically read a 64bit value. So we
> +	 * have two optimization chances, 1) when caller doesn't need
> +	 * delta_exec and 2) when the task's delta_exec is 0. The former is
> +	 * obvious. The latter is complicated. reading ->on_cpu is racy, but
> +	 * this is ok. If we race with it leaving cpu, we'll take a lock. So
> +	 * we're correct. If we race with it entering cpu, unaccounted time
> +	 * is 0. This is indistinguishable from the read occurring a few
> +	 * cycles earlier.
> +	 */
> +	if (!add_delta || !p->on_cpu)
> +		return p->se.sum_exec_runtime;

I'm not sure this is correct from an smp ordering POV. p->on_cpu may appear
to be 0 whereas the task is actually running for a while and p->se.sum_exec_runtime
can then be past the actual value on the remote CPU.

> +#endif
> +
>  	rq = task_rq_lock(p, &flags);
>  	ns = p->se.sum_exec_runtime;
>  	if (add_delta)
> -- 
> 1.7.1
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2013-06-18 14:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-05-26 21:35 [PATCH v5 0/8] posix timers fixlet kosaki.motohiro
2013-05-26 21:35 ` [PATCH 1/8] posix-cpu-timers: don't account cpu timer after stopped thread runtime accounting kosaki.motohiro
2013-05-26 21:35 ` [PATCH 2/8] posix-cpu-timers: fix acounting delta_exec twice kosaki.motohiro
2013-06-03 19:07   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-05-26 21:35 ` kosaki.motohiro
2013-05-26 21:35 ` [PATCH 3/8] posix-cpu-timers: fix wrong timer initialization kosaki.motohiro
2013-06-18 14:20   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-06-18 15:12     ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-06-19 20:56       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-05-26 21:35 ` [PATCH 4/8] posix-cpu-timers: timer functions should use timer time instead of clock time kosaki.motohiro
2013-05-26 21:35 ` [PATCH 5/8] posix-cpu-timers: check_thread_timers() uses task_sched_runtime() kosaki.motohiro
2013-05-26 21:35 ` [PATCH 6/8] sched: task_sched_runtime introduce micro optimization kosaki.motohiro
2013-06-18 14:27   ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2013-06-18 15:17     ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-06-18 15:28       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-06-18 17:18       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-06-20  8:41         ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-05-26 21:35 ` [PATCH 7/8] posix-cpu-timers: cleanup cpu_{clock,timer}_sample{,_group} kosaki.motohiro
2013-05-26 21:35 ` [PATCH 8/8] posix-cpu-timers: fix cputimer initialization mistake for {u,s}time kosaki.motohiro
2013-05-31 16:26 ` [PATCH v5 0/8] posix timers fixlet KOSAKI Motohiro

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=20130618142744.GG17619@somewhere.redhat.com \
    --to=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=olivier@trillion01.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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

Powered by JetHome