From: Zijun Hu <zijuhu@codeaurora.org>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] sched/cfs: Fix pick_next_entity() implementation error
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2020 19:43:36 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a2134b46-88b5-9260-1b6f-60f5b189e86c@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKfTPtBn0Bh4DjSs_nATYPvRt5Ks2Dg8n0TH7vuxtFfKFTxG5A@mail.gmail.com>
thanks for your explanation.
you are right. @lest should be used as reference point to compare.
Please ignore this patch.
On 7/1/2020 6:47 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 at 12:07, Zijun Hu <zijuhu@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>
>> sched_entity @se not static @left should be compared
>> to pick up @cfs_rq->next.
>
> Could you elaborate why ?
>
> left is the leftmost sched_entity and the one that should be used.
>
> se != left means that left should be skipped after a yield and the
> next se in the rbtree is not "far" from left although it has higher
> vruntime
>
> if we finally want to use last or next instead of se, we must ensure
> that they are still not "far" from left otherwise you can promote a
> sched entity that ends up having a really high vruntime
>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Zijun Hu <zijuhu@codeaurora.org>
>> ---
>> kernel/sched/fair.c | 4 ++--
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> index 658aa7a2ae6f..4790f2d851ad 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> @@ -4452,13 +4452,13 @@ pick_next_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *curr)
>> /*
>> * Prefer last buddy, try to return the CPU to a preempted task.
>> */
>> - if (cfs_rq->last && wakeup_preempt_entity(cfs_rq->last, left) < 1)
>> + if (cfs_rq->last && wakeup_preempt_entity(cfs_rq->last, se) < 1)
>> se = cfs_rq->last;
>>
>> /*
>> * Someone really wants this to run. If it's not unfair, run it.
>> */
>> - if (cfs_rq->next && wakeup_preempt_entity(cfs_rq->next, left) < 1)
>> + if (cfs_rq->next && wakeup_preempt_entity(cfs_rq->next, se) < 1)
>> se = cfs_rq->next;
>>
>> clear_buddies(cfs_rq, se);
>> --
>> The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
>>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-01 11:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-01 10:07 [PATCH v1] sched/cfs: Fix pick_next_entity() implementation error Zijun Hu
2020-07-01 10:47 ` Vincent Guittot
2020-07-01 11:43 ` Zijun Hu [this message]
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=a2134b46-88b5-9260-1b6f-60f5b189e86c@codeaurora.org \
--to=zijuhu@codeaurora.org \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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).