From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net, oleg@redhat.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org,
dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, mgorman@suse.de,
ebiederm@xmission.com, bigeasy@linutronix.de,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tj@kernel.org,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/6] sched: Change wait_task_inactive()s match_state
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2022 11:29:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yxhkhn55uHZx+NGl@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Yxcm6oOTbmCbsHvj@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 12:54:34PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Suggestion #1:
> >
> > - Shouldn't we rename task_running() to something like task_on_cpu()? The
> > task_running() primitive is similar to TASK_RUNNING but is not based off
> > any TASK_FLAGS.
>
> That looks like a simple enough patch, lemme go do that.
---
Subject: sched: Rename task_running() to task_on_cpu()
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Date: Tue Sep 6 12:33:04 CEST 2022
There is some ambiguity about task_running() in that it is unrelated
to TASK_RUNNING but instead tests ->on_cpu. As such, rename the thing
task_on_cpu().
Suggested-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
---
kernel/sched/core.c | 10 +++++-----
kernel/sched/core_sched.c | 2 +-
kernel/sched/deadline.c | 6 +++---
kernel/sched/fair.c | 2 +-
kernel/sched/rt.c | 6 +++---
kernel/sched/sched.h | 2 +-
6 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -2778,7 +2778,7 @@ static int affine_move_task(struct rq *r
return -EINVAL;
}
- if (task_running(rq, p) || READ_ONCE(p->__state) == TASK_WAKING) {
+ if (task_on_cpu(rq, p) || READ_ONCE(p->__state) == TASK_WAKING) {
/*
* MIGRATE_ENABLE gets here because 'p == current', but for
* anything else we cannot do is_migration_disabled(), punt
@@ -3290,11 +3290,11 @@ unsigned long wait_task_inactive(struct
*
* NOTE! Since we don't hold any locks, it's not
* even sure that "rq" stays as the right runqueue!
- * But we don't care, since "task_running()" will
+ * But we don't care, since "task_on_cpu()" will
* return false if the runqueue has changed and p
* is actually now running somewhere else!
*/
- while (task_running(rq, p)) {
+ while (task_on_cpu(rq, p)) {
if (match_state && unlikely(READ_ONCE(p->__state) != match_state))
return 0;
cpu_relax();
@@ -3307,7 +3307,7 @@ unsigned long wait_task_inactive(struct
*/
rq = task_rq_lock(p, &rf);
trace_sched_wait_task(p);
- running = task_running(rq, p);
+ running = task_on_cpu(rq, p);
queued = task_on_rq_queued(p);
ncsw = 0;
if (!match_state || READ_ONCE(p->__state) == match_state)
@@ -8649,7 +8649,7 @@ int __sched yield_to(struct task_struct
if (curr->sched_class != p->sched_class)
goto out_unlock;
- if (task_running(p_rq, p) || !task_is_running(p))
+ if (task_on_cpu(p_rq, p) || !task_is_running(p))
goto out_unlock;
yielded = curr->sched_class->yield_to_task(rq, p);
--- a/kernel/sched/core_sched.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core_sched.c
@@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ static unsigned long sched_core_update_c
* core has now entered/left forced idle state. Defer accounting to the
* next scheduling edge, rather than always forcing a reschedule here.
*/
- if (task_running(rq, p))
+ if (task_on_cpu(rq, p))
resched_curr(rq);
task_rq_unlock(rq, p, &rf);
--- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
@@ -2087,7 +2087,7 @@ static void task_fork_dl(struct task_str
static int pick_dl_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int cpu)
{
- if (!task_running(rq, p) &&
+ if (!task_on_cpu(rq, p) &&
cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, &p->cpus_mask))
return 1;
return 0;
@@ -2241,7 +2241,7 @@ static struct rq *find_lock_later_rq(str
if (double_lock_balance(rq, later_rq)) {
if (unlikely(task_rq(task) != rq ||
!cpumask_test_cpu(later_rq->cpu, &task->cpus_mask) ||
- task_running(rq, task) ||
+ task_on_cpu(rq, task) ||
!dl_task(task) ||
!task_on_rq_queued(task))) {
double_unlock_balance(rq, later_rq);
@@ -2475,7 +2475,7 @@ static void pull_dl_task(struct rq *this
*/
static void task_woken_dl(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
{
- if (!task_running(rq, p) &&
+ if (!task_on_cpu(rq, p) &&
!test_tsk_need_resched(rq->curr) &&
p->nr_cpus_allowed > 1 &&
dl_task(rq->curr) &&
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -7938,7 +7938,7 @@ int can_migrate_task(struct task_struct
/* Record that we found at least one task that could run on dst_cpu */
env->flags &= ~LBF_ALL_PINNED;
- if (task_running(env->src_rq, p)) {
+ if (task_on_cpu(env->src_rq, p)) {
schedstat_inc(p->stats.nr_failed_migrations_running);
return 0;
}
--- a/kernel/sched/rt.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/rt.c
@@ -1849,7 +1849,7 @@ static void put_prev_task_rt(struct rq *
static int pick_rt_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int cpu)
{
- if (!task_running(rq, p) &&
+ if (!task_on_cpu(rq, p) &&
cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, &p->cpus_mask))
return 1;
@@ -2004,7 +2004,7 @@ static struct rq *find_lock_lowest_rq(st
*/
if (unlikely(task_rq(task) != rq ||
!cpumask_test_cpu(lowest_rq->cpu, &task->cpus_mask) ||
- task_running(rq, task) ||
+ task_on_cpu(rq, task) ||
!rt_task(task) ||
!task_on_rq_queued(task))) {
@@ -2462,7 +2462,7 @@ static void pull_rt_task(struct rq *this
*/
static void task_woken_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
{
- bool need_to_push = !task_running(rq, p) &&
+ bool need_to_push = !task_on_cpu(rq, p) &&
!test_tsk_need_resched(rq->curr) &&
p->nr_cpus_allowed > 1 &&
(dl_task(rq->curr) || rt_task(rq->curr)) &&
--- a/kernel/sched/sched.h
+++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h
@@ -2060,7 +2060,7 @@ static inline int task_current(struct rq
return rq->curr == p;
}
-static inline int task_running(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
+static inline int task_on_cpu(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
{
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
return p->on_cpu;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-07 9:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-22 11:18 [PATCH v3 0/6] Freezer Rewrite Peter Zijlstra
2022-08-22 11:18 ` [PATCH v3 1/6] freezer: Have {,un}lock_system_sleep() save/restore flags Peter Zijlstra
2022-08-23 17:25 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-08-22 11:18 ` [PATCH v3 2/6] freezer,umh: Clean up freezer/initrd interaction Peter Zijlstra
2022-08-23 17:28 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-08-22 11:18 ` [PATCH v3 3/6] sched: Change wait_task_inactive()s match_state Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-04 10:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2022-09-06 10:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-07 7:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2022-09-07 9:29 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2022-09-07 9:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-08-22 11:18 ` [PATCH v3 4/6] sched/completion: Add wait_for_completion_state() Peter Zijlstra
2022-08-23 17:32 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-08-26 21:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-04 10:46 ` Ingo Molnar
2022-09-06 10:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-07 7:35 ` Ingo Molnar
2022-09-07 9:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-08-22 11:18 ` [PATCH v3 5/6] sched/wait: Add wait_event_state() Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-04 9:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2022-09-06 11:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-07 7:26 ` Ingo Molnar
2022-08-22 11:18 ` [PATCH v3 6/6] freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Peter Zijlstra
2022-08-23 17:36 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-09-04 10:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2022-09-06 11:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-07 7:30 ` Ingo Molnar
2022-09-23 7:21 ` Christian Borntraeger
2022-09-23 7:53 ` Christian Borntraeger
2022-09-26 8:06 ` Christian Borntraeger
2022-09-26 10:55 ` Christian Borntraeger
2022-09-26 12:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-26 12:32 ` Christian Borntraeger
2022-09-26 12:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-26 13:23 ` Christian Borntraeger
2022-09-26 13:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-26 13:54 ` Christian Borntraeger
2022-09-26 15:49 ` Christian Borntraeger
2022-09-26 18:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-26 18:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-27 5:35 ` Christian Borntraeger
2022-09-28 5:44 ` Christian Borntraeger
2022-10-21 17:22 ` Ville Syrjälä
2022-10-25 4:52 ` Ville Syrjälä
2022-10-25 10:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-10-26 10:32 ` Ville Syrjälä
2022-10-26 11:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-10-26 12:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-10-26 12:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-10-27 5:58 ` Chen Yu
2022-10-27 7:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-10-27 13:09 ` Ville Syrjälä
2022-10-27 16:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-11-02 16:57 ` Ville Syrjälä
2022-11-02 22:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-11-07 11:47 ` Ville Syrjälä
2022-11-10 20:27 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 6/6] freezer, sched: " Ville Syrjälä
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=Yxhkhn55uHZx+NGl@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=will@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).