[PATCH 11/14] sched: filter task pull request
Vincent Guittot
vincent.guittot at linaro.org
Wed May 22 12:03:43 EDT 2013
On 22 May 2013 17:56, Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen at arm.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 11:00:58AM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>> Part of this patch is missing, the fix below is needed
>>
>> @@ -3497,7 +3497,9 @@ static bool is_buddy_full(int cpu)
>> static bool is_my_buddy(int cpu, int buddy)
>> {
>> int my_buddy = per_cpu(sd_pack_buddy, cpu);
>> - return (my_buddy == -1) || (buddy == my_buddy);
>> +
>> + return ((sysctl_sched_packing_mode == SCHED_PACKING_FULL) &&
>> + ((my_buddy == -1) || (buddy == my_buddy)));
>> }
>>
>> static bool is_light_task(struct task_struct *p)
>>
>>
>> On 25 April 2013 19:23, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot at linaro.org> wrote:
>> > Only CPUs that participates to the packing effort can pull tasks on a busiest
>> > group.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot at linaro.org>
>> > ---
>> > kernel/sched/fair.c | 14 ++++++++++++--
>> > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> > index 28f8ea7..6f63fb9 100644
>> > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> > @@ -3494,6 +3494,12 @@ static bool is_buddy_full(int cpu)
>> > return (sum * 1024 >= period * 1000);
>> > }
>> >
>> > +static bool is_my_buddy(int cpu, int buddy)
>> > +{
>> > + int my_buddy = per_cpu(sd_pack_buddy, cpu);
>> > + return (my_buddy == -1) || (buddy == my_buddy);
>> > +}
>
> Would it make sense to change the function name to something like
> is_packing_target() and only have one argument?
I have replaced it with is_packing_cpu(int cpu) in my next version.
This function returns true if the cpu is part of the packing effort
>
> is_my_buddy() is only used with the same variable for both arguments
> like below.
>
>> > +
>> > static bool is_light_task(struct task_struct *p)
>> > {
>> > /* A light task runs less than 20% in average */
>> > @@ -4688,8 +4694,8 @@ static inline void update_sg_lb_stats(struct lb_env *env,
>> >
>> > /* Bias balancing toward cpus of our domain */
>> > if (local_group) {
>> > - if (idle_cpu(i) && !first_idle_cpu &&
>> > - cpumask_test_cpu(i, sched_group_mask(group))) {
>> > + if (is_my_buddy(i, i) && idle_cpu(i) && !first_idle_cpu
>> > + && cpumask_test_cpu(i, sched_group_mask(group))) {
>> > first_idle_cpu = 1;
>> > balance_cpu = i;
>> > }
>> > @@ -4817,6 +4823,10 @@ static void update_plb_buddy(int cpu, int *balance, struct sd_lb_stats *sds,
>> >
>> > /* Get my new buddy */
>> > buddy = per_cpu(sd_pack_buddy, cpu);
>> > +
>> > + /* This CPU doesn't act for agressive packing */
>> > + if (buddy != cpu)
>> > + sds->busiest = 0;
>
> sds->busiest is a pointer, so I think it should be assigned to NULL
> instead of 0.
yes
Thanks
Vincent
>
> Morten
>
>> > }
>> >
>> > /**
>> > --
>> > 1.7.9.5
>> >
>>
>
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list