mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Dmitry Adamushko" <dmitry.adamushko@gmail.com>
To: "Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	RT <linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>,
	"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"Gregory Haskins" <ghaskins@novell.com>,
	"Peter Zijlstra" <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/8] track highest prio queued on runqueue
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 20:14:29 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b647ffbd0710201114g7fb37652r1e28dddbc7e879f4@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071019184336.349767581@goodmis.org>

On 19/10/2007, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> [ ... ]
>
===================================================================
> --- linux-test.git.orig/kernel/sched.c  2007-10-19 12:33:09.000000000 -0400
> +++ linux-test.git/kernel/sched.c       2007-10-19 12:34:32.000000000 -0400
> @@ -324,6 +324,8 @@ struct rq {
>         int push_cpu;
>         /* cpu of this runqueue: */
>         int cpu;
> +       /* highest queued rt task prio */
> +       int highest_prio;

again, could it be moved to 'struct rt_rq' ?
(so we want to cache it as we don't want to trash more per-cpu bytes
calling smth like
if (!rt_nr_running) sched_find_first_bit() from other CPUs)


> @@ -972,6 +974,8 @@ static void activate_task(struct rq *rq,
>
>         enqueue_task(rq, p, wakeup);
>         inc_nr_running(p, rq);
> +
> +       rq_prio_add_task(rq, p);
>  }
>
>  /*
> @@ -984,6 +988,8 @@ static void deactivate_task(struct rq *r
>
>         dequeue_task(rq, p, sleep);
>         dec_nr_running(p, rq);
> +
> +       rq_prio_remove_task(rq, p);
>  }

{enqueue,dequeue}_task_rt() would be more appropriate places.


> +static inline void rq_prio_add_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
> +{
> +       if (unlikely(rt_task(p)) && p->prio < rq->highest_prio)
> +               rq->highest_prio = p->prio;
> +}
> +
> +static inline void rq_prio_remove_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
> +{
> +       struct rt_prio_array *array;
> +
> +       if (unlikely(rt_task(p))) {
> +               if (rq->rt_nr_running) {
> +                       if (p->prio >= rq->highest_prio) {
> +                               /* recalculate */
> +                               array = &rq->rt.active;
> +                               rq->highest_prio =
> +                                       sched_find_first_bit(array->bitmap);
> +                       } /* otherwise leave rq->highest prio alone */
> +               } else
> +                       rq->highest_prio = MAX_RT_PRIO;
> +       }
> +}
> +#endif /* CONFIG_SMP */
> +

(just a few thoughts)

we call sched_find_first_bit() in pick_next_task_rt() in the case when
rt_nr_running != 0.

So if we can tolerate the 'latency' of updating the 'highest_prio' ==
the interval of time between deactivate_task() and pick_next_task() in
schedule() then rq_prio_remove_task() would just need to do a single
thing:

/* No more RT tasks: */
if (!rt_nr_running)
        highest_prio = MAX_RT_PRIO;

and then,

static struct task_struct *pick_next_task_rt(struct rq *rq)
{
        struct rt_prio_array *array = &rq->rt.active;
        struct task_struct *next;
        struct list_head *queue;
        int idx;

-        idx = sched_find_first_bit(array->bitmap);
+       rq->highest_prio = idx = sched_find_first_bit(array->bitmap);

[ ... ]

additionally, if we can tolerate the 'latency' (of updating
highest_prio) == the worst case scheduling latency, then
rq_prio_add_task() is not necessary at all.


-- 
Best regards,
Dmitry Adamushko

  parent reply	other threads:[~2007-10-20 18:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-10-19 18:42 [patch 0/8] New RT Task Balancing Steven Rostedt
2007-10-19 18:42 ` [patch 1/8] Add rt_nr_running accounting Steven Rostedt
2007-10-20 16:45   ` Dmitry Adamushko
2007-10-21  2:13     ` Steven Rostedt
2007-10-19 18:42 ` [patch 2/8] track highest prio queued on runqueue Steven Rostedt
2007-10-19 19:19   ` Steven Rostedt
2007-10-19 19:45   ` Gregory Haskins
2007-10-19 19:57     ` Steven Rostedt
2007-10-20 18:14   ` Dmitry Adamushko [this message]
2007-10-21  2:19     ` Steven Rostedt
2007-10-19 18:42 ` [patch 3/8] push RT tasks Steven Rostedt
2007-10-19 18:42 ` [patch 4/8] RT overloaded runqueues accounting Steven Rostedt
2007-10-19 18:42 ` [patch 5/8] Move prototypes together Steven Rostedt
2007-10-19 18:43 ` [patch 6/8] pull RT tasks Steven Rostedt
2007-10-19 19:24   ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-10-19 19:35     ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-10-19 19:43       ` Steven Rostedt
2007-10-21  9:35   ` Dmitry Adamushko
2007-10-22 13:55     ` Steven Rostedt
2007-10-21 11:59   ` Dmitry Adamushko
2007-10-22 14:05     ` Steven Rostedt
2007-10-22 22:34       ` Dmitry Adamushko
2007-10-23  1:16         ` Steven Rostedt
2007-10-19 18:43 ` [patch 7/8] wake up balance RT Steven Rostedt
2007-10-19 18:43 ` [patch 8/8] disable CFS RT load balancing 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=b647ffbd0710201114g7fb37652r1e28dddbc7e879f4@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=dmitry.adamushko@gmail.com \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=ghaskins@novell.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /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®