All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: chengchao <chengchao@kedacom.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, tj@kernel.org,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, chris@chris-wilson.co.uk,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/core: simpler function for sched_exec migration
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 10:11:59 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <db5c6fcd-ae5d-0f41-2d45-d161421cf9c4@kedacom.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160905131147.GA8552@redhat.com>

Oleg, thank you.

the key point is for CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE=y, if sched_exec needs migrate the current, 
migration_cpu_stop doesn't migrate the task(current) at all, it means that the stopper thread does some 
unuseful works in this scenario.
finally,the stopper thread calls cpu_stop_signal_done() to wake up this task, it calls select_task_rq() again, 
maybe select another different cpu. totally calls select_task_rq() two times(first at sched_exec())
plus one time(wake_up_new_task() also calls select_task_rq()).

it is too much overhead for one task(fork()+exec()), isn't it?



1.
sched_exec()
  ->stop_one_cpu()
    ->wait_for_completion().
     wait_for_completion() makes the current TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE and call schedule_timeout()

schedule_timeout(timeout)  timeout is MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT.
  ->schedule()
	deactivate_task(rq, current, DEQUEUE_SLEEP);
	current->on_rq = 0;

2.
migration_cpu_stop() checks the task_on_rq_queued(p), but the task p->on_rq is 0.

#define TASK_ON_RQ_QUEUED       1

static inline int task_on_rq_queued(struct task_struct *p)
{
        return p->on_rq == TASK_ON_RQ_QUEUED;
}


migration_cpu_stop()
...
        if (task_rq(p) == rq && task_on_rq_queued(p))   
                rq = __migrate_task(rq, p, arg->dest_cpu);
...


thanks again, any suggestions and more reviews are welcome.


on 09/05/2016 09:11 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 09/05, cheng chao wrote:
>>
>> @@ -2958,7 +2958,7 @@ void sched_exec(void)
>>  		struct migration_arg arg = { p, dest_cpu };
>>  
>>  		raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&p->pi_lock, flags);
>> -		stop_one_cpu(task_cpu(p), migration_cpu_stop, &arg);
>> +		stop_one_cpu_sync(task_cpu(p), migration_cpu_stop, &arg);
>>  		return;
>>  	}
>>  unlock:
>> diff --git a/kernel/stop_machine.c b/kernel/stop_machine.c
>> index 4a1ca5f..24f8637 100644
>> --- a/kernel/stop_machine.c
>> +++ b/kernel/stop_machine.c
>> @@ -130,6 +130,27 @@ int stop_one_cpu(unsigned int cpu, cpu_stop_fn_t fn, void *arg)
>>  	return done.ret;
>>  }
>>  
>> +/**
>> + * the caller keeps task_on_rq_queued, so it's more suitable for
>> + * sched_exec on the case when needs migration
>> + */
>> +void stop_one_cpu_sync(unsigned int cpu, cpu_stop_fn_t fn, void *arg)
>> +{
>> +	struct cpu_stop_work work = { .fn = fn, .arg = arg, .done = NULL };
>> +
>> +	if (!cpu_stop_queue_work(cpu, &work))
>> +		return;
>> +
>> +#if defined(CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE) || defined(CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY)
>> +	/*
>> +	 * CONFIG_PREEMPT doesn't need call schedule here, because
>> +	 * preempt_enable already does the similar thing when call
>> +	 * cpu_stop_queue_work
>> +	 */
>> +	schedule();
>> +#endif
>> +}
> 
> Honestly, I don't really understand the changelog, but this looks wrong.
> 
> stop_one_cpu_sync() assumes that cpu == smp_processor_id/task_cpu(current),
> and thus the stopper thread should preempt us at least after schedule()
> (if CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE), so we do not need to synchronize.
> 
   yes. the stop_one_cpu_sync is not a good name, stop_one_cpu_schedule is better?  
there is nothing about synchronization.

> But this is not necessarily true? This task can migrate to another CPU
> before cpu_stop_queue_work() ?
>
  before sched_exec() calls stop_one_cpu()/cpu_stop_queue_work(), this task(current) cannot migrate 
to another cpu,because this task is running on the cpu.

 
> Oleg.
> 
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2016-09-06  2:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-09-05  6:20 [PATCH] sched/core: simpler function for sched_exec migration cheng chao
2016-09-05 13:11 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-09-06  2:11   ` chengchao [this message]
2016-09-06 15:22     ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-09-07  3:22       ` chengchao
2016-09-07 12:35         ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-09-08  2:17           ` chengchao
2016-09-09 10:05           ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-09  1:39 ` [lkp] [sched/core] 3d26b7622f: BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 00000001 kernel test robot
2016-09-09  1:39   ` kernel test robot
2016-09-09  2:04   ` [lkp] " chengchao
2016-09-09  2:26     ` Ye Xiaolong
2016-09-09  2:26       ` Ye Xiaolong
2016-09-09  2:36       ` [lkp] " chengchao

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=db5c6fcd-ae5d-0f41-2d45-d161421cf9c4@kedacom.com \
    --to=chengchao@kedacom.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tj@kernel.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.