lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Nov]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] sched: Minor cleanups
    On Mon, Nov 19, 2007 at 02:08:03PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
    > > #define for_each_leaf_cfs_rq(rq, cfs_rq) \
    > > - list_for_each_entry(cfs_rq, &rq->leaf_cfs_rq_list, leaf_cfs_rq_list)
    > > + list_for_each_entry_rcu(cfs_rq, &rq->leaf_cfs_rq_list, leaf_cfs_rq_list)
    > >
    > > /* Do the two (enqueued) entities belong to the same group ? */
    > > static inline int
    > > @@ -1126,7 +1126,10 @@ static void print_cfs_stats(struct seq_f
    > > #ifdef CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED
    > > print_cfs_rq(m, cpu, &cpu_rq(cpu)->cfs);
    > > #endif
    > > +
    > > + rcu_read_lock();
    > > for_each_leaf_cfs_rq(cpu_rq(cpu), cfs_rq)
    > > print_cfs_rq(m, cpu, cfs_rq);
    > > + rcu_read_unlock();
    >
    > hm, why is this a cleanup?

    Sorry for the wrong subject. It was supposed to include the above bug fix,
    related to how we walk the task group list.

    Thinking abt it now, I realize that print_cfs_rq() can potentially
    sleep and hence it cannot be surrounded by rcu_read_lock()/unlock().

    And as Dipankar just pointed me, sched_create/destroy_group aren't
    serialized at all currently, so we need a mutex to protect them. The
    same mutex can be then used when walking the list in print_cfs_stats() ..

    Will send update patches soon ..


    --
    Regards,
    vatsa
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2007-11-19 15:51    [W:0.023 / U:29.624 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site