From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched: Extract the task putting code from pick_next_task()
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 18:32:32 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200420183232.16b83374@gandalf.local.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7c1eab789cb4b53ec5f54644c089ce27ea14088a.1587309963.git.yu.c.chen@intel.com>
On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 00:31:52 +0800
Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com> wrote:
> Introduce a new function finish_prev_task() to do the balance
> when necessary, and then put previous task back to the run queue.
> This function is extracted from pick_next_task() to prepare for
> future usage by other type of task picking logic.
>
> No functional change.
>
> Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Signed-off-by: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
> ---
> kernel/sched/core.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index 3a61a3b8eaa9..bf59a5cf030c 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -3904,6 +3904,28 @@ static inline void schedule_debug(struct task_struct *prev, bool preempt)
> schedstat_inc(this_rq()->sched_count);
> }
>
> +static void finish_prev_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev,
> + struct rq_flags *rf)
> +{
> + const struct sched_class *class;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> + /*
> + * We must do the balancing pass before put_next_task(), such
I know this is just a cut and paste move, but I'm thinking that this
comment is wrong. Shouldn't this be "put_prev_task()" as we have no
"put_next_task()" function.
> + * that when we release the rq->lock the task is in the same
> + * state as before we took rq->lock.
> + *
> + * We can terminate the balance pass as soon as we know there is
> + * a runnable task of @class priority or higher.
> + */
> + for_class_range(class, prev->sched_class, &idle_sched_class) {
> + if (class->balance(rq, prev, rf))
> + break;
> + }
> +#endif
> +
> + put_prev_task(rq, prev);
> +}
> +
> /*
> * Pick up the highest-prio task:
> */
> @@ -3937,22 +3959,7 @@ pick_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, struct rq_flags *rf)
> }
>
> restart:
> -#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> - /*
> - * We must do the balancing pass before put_next_task(), such
> - * that when we release the rq->lock the task is in the same
> - * state as before we took rq->lock.
> - *
> - * We can terminate the balance pass as soon as we know there is
> - * a runnable task of @class priority or higher.
> - */
> - for_class_range(class, prev->sched_class, &idle_sched_class) {
> - if (class->balance(rq, prev, rf))
> - break;
> - }
> -#endif
> -
> - put_prev_task(rq, prev);
> + finish_prev_task(rq, prev, rf);
I'm not sure I like the name of this function. Perhaps
"balance_and_put_prev_task()"? Something more in kind to what the function
does.
-- Steve
>
> for_each_class(class) {
> p = class->pick_next_task(rq);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-20 22:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-19 16:31 [PATCH 0/2] sched: Clean up newidle_balance() and pick_next_task() Chen Yu
2020-04-19 16:31 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched: Make newidle_balance() static again Chen Yu
2020-04-19 16:31 ` [PATCH 2/2] sched: Extract the task putting code from pick_next_task() Chen Yu
2020-04-20 22:32 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2020-04-20 22:55 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-04-20 23:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-04-21 2:23 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-04-21 7:42 ` Vincent Guittot
2020-04-21 8:38 ` Chen Yu
2020-04-21 8:28 ` Chen Yu
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=20200420183232.16b83374@gandalf.local.home \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=yu.c.chen@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®