linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: mingo@kernel.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
	luca.abeni@santannapisa.it, bristot@redhat.com,
	balsini@android.com, dvyukov@google.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
	vpillai@digitalocean.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
	peterz@infradead.org
Subject: [RFC][PATCH 08/13] sched: Rework pick_next_task() slow-path
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 16:54:17 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190726161357.812535015@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20190726145409.947503076@infradead.org

Avoid the RETRY_TASK case in the pick_next_task() slow path.

By doing the put_prev_task() early, we get the rt/deadline pull done,
and by testing rq->nr_running we know if we need newidle_balance().

This then gives a stable state to pick a task from.

Since the fast-path is fair only; it means the other classes will
always have pick_next_task(.prev=NULL, .rf=NULL) and we can simplify.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
---
 kernel/sched/core.c      |   19 ++++++++++++-------
 kernel/sched/deadline.c  |   30 ++----------------------------
 kernel/sched/fair.c      |    9 ++++++---
 kernel/sched/idle.c      |    4 +++-
 kernel/sched/rt.c        |   29 +----------------------------
 kernel/sched/sched.h     |   13 ++++++++-----
 kernel/sched/stop_task.c |    3 ++-
 7 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 73 deletions(-)

--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -3739,7 +3739,7 @@ pick_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct tas
 
 		p = fair_sched_class.pick_next_task(rq, prev, rf);
 		if (unlikely(p == RETRY_TASK))
-			goto again;
+			goto restart;
 
 		/* Assumes fair_sched_class->next == idle_sched_class */
 		if (unlikely(!p))
@@ -3748,14 +3748,19 @@ pick_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct tas
 		return p;
 	}
 
-again:
+restart:
+	/*
+	 * Ensure that we put DL/RT tasks before the pick loop, such that they
+	 * can PULL higher prio tasks when we lower the RQ 'priority'.
+	 */
+	prev->sched_class->put_prev_task(rq, prev, rf);
+	if (!rq->nr_running)
+		newidle_balance(rq, rf);
+
 	for_each_class(class) {
-		p = class->pick_next_task(rq, prev, rf);
-		if (p) {
-			if (unlikely(p == RETRY_TASK))
-				goto again;
+		p = class->pick_next_task(rq, NULL, NULL);
+		if (p)
 			return p;
-		}
 	}
 
 	/* The idle class should always have a runnable task: */
--- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
@@ -1729,39 +1729,13 @@ pick_next_task_dl(struct rq *rq, struct
 	struct task_struct *p;
 	struct dl_rq *dl_rq;
 
-	dl_rq = &rq->dl;
-
-	if (need_pull_dl_task(rq, prev)) {
-		/*
-		 * This is OK, because current is on_cpu, which avoids it being
-		 * picked for load-balance and preemption/IRQs are still
-		 * disabled avoiding further scheduler activity on it and we're
-		 * being very careful to re-start the picking loop.
-		 */
-		rq_unpin_lock(rq, rf);
-		pull_dl_task(rq);
-		rq_repin_lock(rq, rf);
-		/*
-		 * pull_dl_task() can drop (and re-acquire) rq->lock; this
-		 * means a stop task can slip in, in which case we need to
-		 * re-start task selection.
-		 */
-		if (rq->stop && task_on_rq_queued(rq->stop))
-			return RETRY_TASK;
-	}
+	WARN_ON_ONCE(prev || rf);
 
-	/*
-	 * When prev is DL, we may throttle it in put_prev_task().
-	 * So, we update time before we check for dl_nr_running.
-	 */
-	if (prev->sched_class == &dl_sched_class)
-		update_curr_dl(rq);
+	dl_rq = &rq->dl;
 
 	if (unlikely(!dl_rq->dl_nr_running))
 		return NULL;
 
-	put_prev_task(rq, prev);
-
 	dl_se = pick_next_dl_entity(rq, dl_rq);
 	BUG_ON(!dl_se);
 
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -6740,7 +6740,7 @@ pick_next_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struc
 		goto idle;
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED
-	if (prev->sched_class != &fair_sched_class)
+	if (!prev || prev->sched_class != &fair_sched_class)
 		goto simple;
 
 	/*
@@ -6817,8 +6817,8 @@ pick_next_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struc
 	goto done;
 simple:
 #endif
-
-	put_prev_task(rq, prev);
+	if (prev)
+		put_prev_task(rq, prev);
 
 	do {
 		se = pick_next_entity(cfs_rq, NULL);
@@ -6846,6 +6846,9 @@ done: __maybe_unused;
 	return p;
 
 idle:
+	if (!rf)
+		return NULL;
+
 	new_tasks = newidle_balance(rq, rf);
 
 	/*
--- a/kernel/sched/idle.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/idle.c
@@ -389,7 +389,9 @@ pick_next_task_idle(struct rq *rq, struc
 {
 	struct task_struct *next = rq->idle;
 
-	put_prev_task(rq, prev);
+	if (prev)
+		put_prev_task(rq, prev);
+
 	set_next_task_idle(rq, next);
 
 	return next;
--- a/kernel/sched/rt.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/rt.c
@@ -1554,38 +1554,11 @@ pick_next_task_rt(struct rq *rq, struct
 	struct task_struct *p;
 	struct rt_rq *rt_rq = &rq->rt;
 
-	if (need_pull_rt_task(rq, prev)) {
-		/*
-		 * This is OK, because current is on_cpu, which avoids it being
-		 * picked for load-balance and preemption/IRQs are still
-		 * disabled avoiding further scheduler activity on it and we're
-		 * being very careful to re-start the picking loop.
-		 */
-		rq_unpin_lock(rq, rf);
-		pull_rt_task(rq);
-		rq_repin_lock(rq, rf);
-		/*
-		 * pull_rt_task() can drop (and re-acquire) rq->lock; this
-		 * means a dl or stop task can slip in, in which case we need
-		 * to re-start task selection.
-		 */
-		if (unlikely((rq->stop && task_on_rq_queued(rq->stop)) ||
-			     rq->dl.dl_nr_running))
-			return RETRY_TASK;
-	}
-
-	/*
-	 * We may dequeue prev's rt_rq in put_prev_task().
-	 * So, we update time before rt_queued check.
-	 */
-	if (prev->sched_class == &rt_sched_class)
-		update_curr_rt(rq);
+	WARN_ON_ONCE(prev || rf);
 
 	if (!rt_rq->rt_queued)
 		return NULL;
 
-	put_prev_task(rq, prev);
-
 	p = _pick_next_task_rt(rq);
 
 	set_next_task_rt(rq, p);
--- a/kernel/sched/sched.h
+++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h
@@ -1704,12 +1704,15 @@ struct sched_class {
 	void (*check_preempt_curr)(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags);
 
 	/*
-	 * It is the responsibility of the pick_next_task() method that will
-	 * return the next task to call put_prev_task() on the @prev task or
-	 * something equivalent.
+	 * Both @prev and @rf are optional and may be NULL, in which case the
+	 * caller must already have invoked put_prev_task(rq, prev, rf).
 	 *
-	 * May return RETRY_TASK when it finds a higher prio class has runnable
-	 * tasks.
+	 * Otherwise it is the responsibility of the pick_next_task() to call
+	 * put_prev_task() on the @prev task or something equivalent, IFF it
+	 * returns a next task.
+	 *
+	 * In that case (@rf != NULL) it may return RETRY_TASK when it finds a
+	 * higher prio class has runnable tasks.
 	 */
 	struct task_struct * (*pick_next_task)(struct rq *rq,
 					       struct task_struct *prev,
--- a/kernel/sched/stop_task.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/stop_task.c
@@ -33,10 +33,11 @@ pick_next_task_stop(struct rq *rq, struc
 {
 	struct task_struct *stop = rq->stop;
 
+	WARN_ON_ONCE(prev || rf);
+
 	if (!stop || !task_on_rq_queued(stop))
 		return NULL;
 
-	put_prev_task(rq, prev);
 	set_next_task_stop(rq, stop);
 
 	return stop;



  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-07-26 16:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-07-26 14:54 [RFC][PATCH 00/13] SCHED_DEADLINE server infrastructure Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-26 14:54 ` [RFC][PATCH 01/13] sched/deadline: Impose global limits on sched_attr::sched_period Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-29  8:57   ` Juri Lelli
2019-07-29 11:45     ` Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
2019-08-02 17:21   ` Alessio Balsini
2019-08-05 11:53     ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-08-22 12:29       ` Alessio Balsini
2019-08-22 16:51         ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-08-31 14:41           ` Alessio Balsini
2019-09-02  9:16             ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-02 12:31               ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-04 10:16               ` Steven Rostedt
2019-09-04 11:30                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-04 13:24                   ` Joel Fernandes
2019-09-04 14:11                     ` Will Deacon
2019-09-04 14:35                       ` Joel Fernandes
2019-09-04 15:52                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-23 17:17       ` [PATCH 4.4 4.9 4.14] loop: Add LOOP_SET_DIRECT_IO to compat ioctl Alessio Balsini
2019-10-23 17:22         ` Alessio Balsini
2019-10-25  0:17         ` Sasha Levin
2020-05-20 18:38   ` [RFC][PATCH 01/13] sched/deadline: Impose global limits on sched_attr::sched_period Juri Lelli
2020-05-21 13:45     ` Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
2020-06-16 12:21   ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-26 14:54 ` [RFC][PATCH 02/13] stop_machine: Fix stop_cpus_in_progress ordering Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-30 13:16   ` Phil Auld
2019-07-30 13:22   ` Steven Rostedt
2019-07-26 14:54 ` [RFC][PATCH 03/13] sched: Fix kerneldoc comment for ia64_set_curr_task Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-26 14:54 ` [RFC][PATCH 04/13] sched/{rt,deadline}: Fix set_next_task vs pick_next_task Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-29  9:25   ` Juri Lelli
2019-07-29 11:15     ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-29 11:27       ` Juri Lelli
2019-07-29 13:04         ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-29 13:17           ` Juri Lelli
2019-07-29 14:40             ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-26 14:54 ` [RFC][PATCH 05/13] sched: Add task_struct pointer to sched_class::set_curr_task Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-26 14:54 ` [RFC][PATCH 06/13] sched/fair: Export newidle_balance() Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-26 14:54 ` [RFC][PATCH 07/13] sched: Allow put_prev_task() to drop rq->lock Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-26 14:54 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2019-07-26 14:54 ` [RFC][PATCH 09/13] sched: Unify runtime accounting across classes Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-26 14:54 ` [RFC][PATCH 10/13] sched/deadline: Collect sched_dl_entity initialization Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-26 14:54 ` [RFC][PATCH 11/13] sched/deadline: Move bandwidth accounting into {en,de}queue_dl_entity Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-26 14:54 ` [RFC][PATCH 12/13] sched/deadline: Introduce deadline servers Peter Zijlstra
2019-08-07 16:31   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-08-08  6:52     ` Juri Lelli
2019-08-08  7:52       ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-08-08  7:56     ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-08-08  8:11       ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-08-08  8:46         ` Juri Lelli
2019-08-08  8:57           ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-08-08  9:27             ` Juri Lelli
2019-08-08  9:45               ` Juri Lelli
2019-08-30 11:24                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-06  9:36                   ` Juri Lelli
2019-08-08 10:31           ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-08-09  7:13             ` Juri Lelli
2019-08-08  6:59   ` Juri Lelli
2019-08-09  9:17   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-08-09 12:16     ` Juri Lelli
2019-07-26 14:54 ` [RFC][PATCH 13/13] sched/fair: Add trivial fair server Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-26 20:01 ` [RFC][PATCH 00/13] SCHED_DEADLINE server infrastructure luca abeni
2019-09-03 14:27 ` Alessio Balsini
2019-09-04 10:50   ` Juri Lelli
2019-09-04 11:32     ` Peter Zijlstra

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=20190726161357.812535015@infradead.org \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=balsini@android.com \
    --cc=bristot@redhat.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=dvyukov@google.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luca.abeni@santannapisa.it \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=vpillai@digitalocean.com \
    /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).