From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1753907AbcH2QeH (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Mon, 29 Aug 2016 12:34:07 -0400
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:48152 "EHLO
        bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751190AbcH2QeG (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 29 Aug 2016 12:34:06 -0400
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 18:33:52 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@mellanox.com>
Cc: Gilad Ben Yossef <giladb@mellanox.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 04/13] task_isolation: add initial support
Message-ID: <20160829163352.GV10153@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1471382376-5443-1-git-send-email-cmetcalf@mellanox.com>
 <1471382376-5443-5-git-send-email-cmetcalf@mellanox.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1471382376-5443-5-git-send-email-cmetcalf@mellanox.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23.1 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 05:19:27PM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> +	/*
> +	 * Request rescheduling unless we are in full dynticks mode.
> +	 * We would eventually get pre-empted without this, and if
> +	 * there's another task waiting, it would run; but by
> +	 * explicitly requesting the reschedule, we may reduce the
> +	 * latency.  We could directly call schedule() here as well,
> +	 * but since our caller is the standard place where schedule()
> +	 * is called, we defer to the caller.
> +	 *
> +	 * A more substantive approach here would be to use a struct
> +	 * completion here explicitly, and complete it when we shut
> +	 * down dynticks, but since we presumably have nothing better
> +	 * to do on this core anyway, just spinning seems plausible.
> +	 */
> +	if (!tick_nohz_tick_stopped())
> +		set_tsk_need_resched(current);

This is broken.. and it would be really good if you don't actually need
to do this.