From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Repeated rto_push_irq_work_func() invocation.
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2024 17:05:43 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241002150543.IhYy2Q9k@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241002103749.14d713c1@gandalf.local.home>
On 2024-10-02 10:37:49 [-0400], Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Oct 2024 13:21:05 +0200
> Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> > Would it make sense to avoid scheduling rto_push_work if rq->curr has
> > NEED_RESCHED set and make the scheduler do push_rt_task()?
>
> Can we safely check rq->curr without taking any locks on that CPU?
>
> I guess tasks do not get freed while a CPU has preemption disabled, so it
> may be safe to do:
>
> task = READ_ONCE(rq->curr);
> if (test_task_need_resched(task))
> /* skip */
>
> ??
+rcu_read_lock() but yes. This would be one part. You need to check if
the task on pull-list has lower priority than the current task on rq.
This would be need to be moved to somewhere in schedule() probably after
pick_next_task().
> -- Steve
Sebastian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-02 15:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-02 11:21 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2024-10-02 14:37 ` Steven Rostedt
2024-10-02 15:05 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [this message]
2024-10-02 15:19 ` Steven Rostedt
2024-10-02 15:35 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2024-10-02 15:54 ` 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=20241002150543.IhYy2Q9k@linutronix.de \
--to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.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®