From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wr1-f50.google.com (mail-wr1-f50.google.com [209.85.221.50]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71D583EFD02 for ; Fri, 9 Oct 2026 05:53:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.221.50 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791525205; cv=none; b=drBVQvNZXRDQ571g6CTw49DdyrsqItHUQXmXE4zPRtZoJYYCRLwVvAnp/yg39oZZJveLUp9d36gQ970JS1YOH7AlsIOSxlLvehPxnGWzdKIZB7ERoK6Oa6CKapHLyJ6gQ/hGp4FZ5Qj55tRZNwvortWD3aM10/bCmc9uCl15e/k= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791525205; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Ban0n7745AzBI+q28L7dD9Gn9SbstwTnM2yds7GYTLM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=WufPhktXNCY/WoQqBzka0pGqjC1oRiJyYFMXXQD8Hjkn73X3VjvdW0RFe+X+6oIEb3AcA11PwbRVN6+n6CGWb2yrecRHIcb8KDPQDGRvEekPsYpZ0ZiEenJbYU4DyMIiBYOFTNIUoHpMAxI+G775vvneFNwiN3NQjCMIdtBpEZc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=YPFkhcT5; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.221.50 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="YPFkhcT5" Received: by mail-wr1-f50.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-48b06f58380so206736f8f.1 for ; Thu, 08 Oct 2026 22:53:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20251104; t=1791525202; x=1792130002; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=wVlDnOJmdRHsN4qn4A2HDhzFDxkd+SqZNh2m1iwQaYA=; b=YPFkhcT5vfxb1V5Pgkij4XWrcW4Lf19inD+lUsMtD4VROFaLvooWnJY80wkW0qLubj svMDNgfRJaUzQHD45XvJS5cGulxeSNK8ENB4sNZFkt186MTGIs2UTBoJLYAiR5ynwdfQ 679mocTqwmQyY+BBfZv+tXNhkc4oZCGGapwCHMvSWIfBJoySLqQa0b/TPPjK7aSu442l XlcxV6sRlfG9NqYv0GIeZlg2B8p0SnqG6mal6odXG1EjMXHjR3pG9eKb+Sqsva5J63wh E6VImS3xfX5JJ6UfMSjPeF/urOjjUt9R1bZZqlpBTc2+S21yQpf+kTFu6MLpGUp5LcuI rHfA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20260707; t=1791525202; x=1792130002; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=wVlDnOJmdRHsN4qn4A2HDhzFDxkd+SqZNh2m1iwQaYA=; b=NF7a/e/K0hmWeRdbqpgaKtU2E3WjvtWp2dWgpXuzMb5zP8NhgPjwLnpp2Rz5i+vTSs UpQjJ/QS9Q1hnXD5Q3ZNnJ6UNvYigGm/0wiGMSGBjjsX2l92ZPwI5FrostJIjy//3s00 H4lcJ5PM2Ivg9rNMvFEHDFrTI2USMi0FCdAamUWgVqIb0PuMqKiv2PD9A9EohrObVFj0 UYdENcGUFJIPxCd30imwrcFJKpRnKe7D9wlfUAA2T990iOgDWF+IdbasjW1erleaP3Ib BEYsc5vm+DJJoWDvOqmFccN4tKDm6MV6FmU/CQnb4chlJDZIe+L+PTh4X8loTiHRBF6r xkYw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AKwUvBx6qCIyAv0AZjfJxhW6la2rzxsP8Z+f9lpd93LLD3bT1isB5utE+W5Laq2mfc8hXxMHuLyi7dOTTvInxds=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AFuF++kl46UakvlkDFRdcO6FVjdiGHwoTCzr5HL0321DaU3ACOLQl+xP 4iS1rXFW9HUz3Z9JZV6obJY1YQqAonr0QWE3WcGJBOdxq/vig3PXH0aD X-Gm-Gg: AYBFou1Zg11bTCE0c8yW9OBneg7E+ly/SH+dcFLVBYJsKb8tCzcVvUTWhmuQotKhkp7 lQ/csNCKOvqBB2hNZ/klZrrnx80nEtJm5AZEzx4a04ugSpBUYR8WAoHL2e3HKrWDU2xYY8rwLuw +iRTBV6dCABcpOZFCoEuUMbHRd//Pah/+P4LMMmbZbWYtJY67HHGjppY/Bf27Ym6TMxBzNbA0Wo w0qUo/g10hFcm6j4j5XXIbZGevY2gjCcaynpEjA7iWbQiNlrn5IxILv2PJFbNuNb/Y0jSWJZemZ DnyFMiU08hrZ/wNqXWU1oD1MpzDienr6tQ9XeDll+X8fdhEZvQ7fM9aRCIw6ROarClU+UN3oS7N ocrTIlZ3Zp2uhyPFez72pJGOrXXCBu/+wy6NSPQZEOVD/B+/sfYDwU4F/DS5gUZJGCdjbhUVF0t XPwVdt24Ymj4oyjTwoykzh/+m3vQM98OYHOGDOGsENIoWMCKqqZoKNO5L3gA+ovQzWzBrSL3mAS f3mVF2JDzH8mT2NtZ0W X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:1912:b0:4a0:73b:a222 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4a18e3ee97dmr11594485e9.0.1791525202556; Thu, 08 Oct 2026 22:53:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lima-kdev.local ([85.100.66.184]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-4a18ca51465sm22826485e9.4.2026.10.08.22.53.19 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 08 Oct 2026 22:53:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Kayra Cizmeci To: vincent.guittot@linaro.org Cc: arighi@nvidia.com, bsegall@google.com, changwoo@igalia.com, christian.loehle@arm.com, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com, kprateek.nayak@amd.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, lukasz.luba@arm.com, mgorman@suse.de, mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, pierre.gondois@arm.com, qyousef@layalina.io, rafael@kernel.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, sched-ext@lists.linux.dev, sshegde@linux.ibm.com, tj@kernel.org, void@manifault.com, vschneid@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/18 v2] sched/fair: Add force push task mechanism for fair Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2026 08:53:17 +0300 Message-ID: <20261009055318.29609-1-kayracizmeci@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.53.0 In-Reply-To: <20261002154415.2270586-11-vincent.guittot@linaro.org> References: <20261002154415.2270586-11-vincent.guittot@linaro.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > task_tick_cache(rq, curr); > > - update_misfit_status(curr, rq); > - check_update_overutilized_status(task_rq(curr)); > + if (!tick_pushable_task(curr, rq, rf)) { > + update_misfit_status(curr, rq); > + check_update_overutilized_status(task_rq(curr)); > + } > > task_tick_core(rq, curr); > } Hm. I think this mechanism added on here does not works. Before fair_check_pushable_task() is called, we check if nr_running is bigger than 1. If it is we return false. So when we enter fair_check_pushable_task(), nr_running is equal or smaller than 1. We first run __check_pushable_fair_task() but it doesn't really matters, since it's output can only return false. Next block is skipped to since next == NULL. When we're at the check_pushable_short_task(), the h_nr_runnable check is always true on this path, so we return false. It this intentional? Or am I missing something? Thanks, Kayra