On 28 January 2014 18:16, Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote:
[snip]
>
> @@ -4662,9 +4682,86 @@ static void check_preempt_wakeup(struct
> static struct task_struct *
> pick_next_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev)
> {
> - struct task_struct *p;
> struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq = &rq->cfs;
> struct sched_entity *se;
> + struct task_struct *p;
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED
> + if (!cfs_rq->nr_running)
> + return NULL;
Couldn't you move the test above out of the CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED
and remove the same test that is done after the simple label
Vincent
> +
> + if (prev->sched_class != &fair_sched_class)
> + goto simple;
> +
> + /*
> + * Because of the set_next_buddy() in dequeue_task_fair() it is rather
> + * likely that a next task is from the same cgroup as the current.
> + *
> + * Therefore attempt to avoid putting and setting the entire cgroup
> + * hierarchy, only change the part that actually changes.
> + */
> +
> + do {
> + struct sched_entity *curr = cfs_rq->curr;
> +
> + /*
> + * Since we got here without doing put_prev_entity() we also
> + * have to consider cfs_rq->curr. If it is still a runnable
> + * entity, update_curr() will update its vruntime, otherwise
> + * forget we've ever seen it.
> + */
> + if (curr && curr->on_rq)
> + update_curr(cfs_rq);
> + else
> + curr = NULL;
> +
> + /*
> + * This call to check_cfs_rq_runtime() will do the throttle
> and
> + * dequeue its entity in the parent(s). Therefore the 'simple'
> + * nr_running test will indeed be correct.
> + */
> + if (unlikely(check_cfs_rq_runtime(cfs_rq)))
> + goto simple;
> +
> + se = pick_next_entity(cfs_rq, curr);
> + cfs_rq = group_cfs_rq(se);
> + } while (cfs_rq);
> +
> + p = task_of(se);
> +
> + /*
> + * Since we haven't yet done put_prev_entity and if the selected task
> + * is a different task than we started out with, try and touch the
> + * least amount of cfs_rqs.
> + */
> + if (prev != p) {
> + struct sched_entity *pse = &prev->se;
> +
> + while (!(cfs_rq = is_same_group(se, pse))) {
> + int se_depth = se->depth;
> + int pse_depth = pse->depth;
> +
> + if (se_depth <= pse_depth) {
> + put_prev_entity(cfs_rq_of(pse), pse);
> + pse = parent_entity(pse);
> + }
> + if (se_depth >= pse_depth) {
> + set_next_entity(cfs_rq_of(se), se);
> + se = parent_entity(se);
> + }
> + }
> +
> + put_prev_entity(cfs_rq, pse);
> + set_next_entity(cfs_rq, se);
> + }
> +
> + if (hrtick_enabled(rq))
> + hrtick_start_fair(rq, p);
> +
> + return p;
> +simple:
> + cfs_rq = &rq->cfs;
> +#endif
>
> if (!cfs_rq->nr_running)
> return NULL;
> @@ -4672,12 +4769,13 @@ pick_next_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struc
> prev->sched_class->put_prev_task(rq, prev);
>
> do {
> - se = pick_next_entity(cfs_rq);
> + se = pick_next_entity(cfs_rq, NULL);
> set_next_entity(cfs_rq, se);
> cfs_rq = group_cfs_rq(se);
> } while (cfs_rq);
>
> p = task_of(se);
> +
> if (hrtick_enabled(rq))
> hrtick_start_fair(rq, p);
>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
