From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752901AbdFVIih (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jun 2017 04:38:37 -0400 Received: from mail-wr0-f193.google.com ([209.85.128.193]:35913 "EHLO mail-wr0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751263AbdFVIie (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jun 2017 04:38:34 -0400 Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 10:38:30 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira Cc: linux-rt-users , "Luis Claudio R . Goncalves" , Clark Williams , Luiz Capitulino , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Thomas Gleixner , Steven Rostedt , Peter Zijlstra , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] rt: Increase/decrease the nr of migratory tasks when enabling/disabling migration Message-ID: <20170622083830.5thlni7wy6ggdbh5@gmail.com> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Daniel Bristot de Oliveira wrote: > void migrate_disable(void) > { > struct task_struct *p = current; > + struct rq *rq; > + struct rq_flags rf; > + > > if (in_atomic() || irqs_disabled()) { > #ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG > @@ -7593,10 +7596,21 @@ void migrate_disable(void) > preempt_disable(); > preempt_lazy_disable(); > pin_current_cpu(); > - p->migrate_disable = 1; > > - p->cpus_ptr = cpumask_of(smp_processor_id()); > + rq = task_rq_lock(p, &rf); > + if (unlikely((p->sched_class == &rt_sched_class || > + p->sched_class == &dl_sched_class) && > + p->nr_cpus_allowed > 1)) { > + if (p->sched_class == &rt_sched_class) > + task_rq(p)->rt.rt_nr_migratory--; > + else > + task_rq(p)->dl.dl_nr_migratory--; > + } > p->nr_cpus_allowed = 1; > + task_rq_unlock(rq, p, &rf); > + p->cpus_ptr = cpumask_of(smp_processor_id()); > + p->migrate_disable = 1; > + > > preempt_enable(); > } > @@ -7605,6 +7619,9 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(migrate_disable); > void migrate_enable(void) > { > struct task_struct *p = current; > + struct rq *rq; > + struct rq_flags rf; > + > > if (in_atomic() || irqs_disabled()) { > #ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG > @@ -7628,17 +7645,24 @@ void migrate_enable(void) > > preempt_disable(); > > - p->cpus_ptr = &p->cpus_mask; > - p->nr_cpus_allowed = cpumask_weight(&p->cpus_mask); > p->migrate_disable = 0; > + p->cpus_ptr = &p->cpus_mask; > > - if (p->migrate_disable_update) { > - struct rq *rq; > - struct rq_flags rf; > + rq = task_rq_lock(p, &rf); > + p->nr_cpus_allowed = cpumask_weight(&p->cpus_mask); > + if (unlikely((p->sched_class == &rt_sched_class || > + p->sched_class == &dl_sched_class) && > + p->nr_cpus_allowed > 1)) { > + if (p->sched_class == &rt_sched_class) > + task_rq(p)->rt.rt_nr_migratory++; > + else > + task_rq(p)->dl.dl_nr_migratory++; > + } > + task_rq_unlock(rq, p, &rf); The fix looks good to me, but AFAICS the repeat pattern introduced here could be factored out into a helper function instead, right? Thanks, Ingo