From: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>
To: Shang XiaoJing <shangxiaojing@huawei.com>,
mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
vschneid@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] sched/deadline: Save processing meaningless ops in dl_task_offline_migration
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 10:33:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3a623696-a0f9-2246-420d-aee88d6acd75@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220827020430.29415-1-shangxiaojing@huawei.com>
On 8/27/22 04:04, Shang XiaoJing wrote:
> Task's bw will be sub from old rd, and add to new rd, even though
> find_lock_later_rq returns a new rq that belong to the same rd with old
> rq. Save ops for moving task's bw if rd is not changed.
This subject is not good. Please change it to a "meaningful" one, describing the
change, not its consequence.
-- Daniel
> Signed-off-by: Shang XiaoJing <shangxiaojing@huawei.com>
> ---
> kernel/sched/deadline.c | 28 +++++++++++++++-------------
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> index 3bf4b12ec5b7..58ca9aaa9c44 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> @@ -714,20 +714,22 @@ static struct rq *dl_task_offline_migration(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p
> add_rq_bw(&p->dl, &later_rq->dl);
> }
>
> - /*
> - * And we finally need to fixup root_domain(s) bandwidth accounting,
> - * since p is still hanging out in the old (now moved to default) root
> - * domain.
> - */
> - dl_b = &rq->rd->dl_bw;
> - raw_spin_lock(&dl_b->lock);
> - __dl_sub(dl_b, p->dl.dl_bw, cpumask_weight(rq->rd->span));
> - raw_spin_unlock(&dl_b->lock);
> + if (&rq->rd != &later_rq->rd) {
> + /*
> + * And we finally need to fixup root_domain(s) bandwidth accounting,
> + * since p is still hanging out in the old (now moved to default) root
> + * domain.
> + */
> + dl_b = &rq->rd->dl_bw;
> + raw_spin_lock(&dl_b->lock);
> + __dl_sub(dl_b, p->dl.dl_bw, cpumask_weight(rq->rd->span));
> + raw_spin_unlock(&dl_b->lock);
>
> - dl_b = &later_rq->rd->dl_bw;
> - raw_spin_lock(&dl_b->lock);
> - __dl_add(dl_b, p->dl.dl_bw, cpumask_weight(later_rq->rd->span));
> - raw_spin_unlock(&dl_b->lock);
> + dl_b = &later_rq->rd->dl_bw;
> + raw_spin_lock(&dl_b->lock);
> + __dl_add(dl_b, p->dl.dl_bw, cpumask_weight(later_rq->rd->span));
> + raw_spin_unlock(&dl_b->lock);
> + }
>
> set_task_cpu(p, later_rq->cpu);
> double_unlock_balance(later_rq, rq);
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-29 8:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-27 2:04 Shang XiaoJing
2022-08-29 8:33 ` Daniel Bristot de Oliveira [this message]
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=3a623696-a0f9-2246-420d-aee88d6acd75@redhat.com \
--to=bristot@redhat.com \
--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=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=shangxiaojing@huawei.com \
--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®