lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Apr]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] sched: fix evaluation of skip_for_load in move_tasks()
Siddha, Suresh B wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 01:08:00PM +1000, Peter Williams wrote:
>> Problem:
>>
>> In the patch
>> sched-avoid-unnecessarily-moving-highest-priority-task-move_tasks.patch
>> I got a the sense of a boolean expression wrong when assigning a value
>> to skip_for_load. The expression should have been negated before being
>> assigned.
>>
>> Additionally, busiest_best_prio_seen is being set when tasks are moved
>> instead of when they are skipped which will cause problems when the
>> current task does not have prio=busiest_best_prio.
>>
>> Solution:
>>
>> Negate the expression and apply de Marcos rule to simplify it and move
>> the setting of busiest_best_prio_seen.
>>
>> This patch is on top of
>> sched-avoid-unnecessarily-moving-highest-priority-task-move_tasks.patch
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Peter Williams <pwil3058@bigpond.com.au>
>>
>> --
>> Peter Williams pwil3058@bigpond.net.au
>>
>> "Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious."
>> -- Ambrose Bierce
>
>> Index: MM-2.6.17-rc1-mm3/kernel/sched.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- MM-2.6.17-rc1-mm3.orig/kernel/sched.c 2006-04-25 12:53:39.000000000 +1000
>> +++ MM-2.6.17-rc1-mm3/kernel/sched.c 2006-04-25 12:56:14.000000000 +1000
>> @@ -2059,7 +2059,10 @@ static int move_tasks(runqueue_t *this_r
>> busiest_best_prio = rq_best_prio(busiest);
>> /*
>> * Enable handling of the case where there is more than one task
>> - * with the best priority.
>> + * with the best priority. If the current running task is one
>> + * of those with prio==busiest_best_prio we know it won't be moved
>> + * and therefore it's safe to override the skip (based on load) of
>> + * any task we find with that prio.
>> */
>> busiest_best_prio_seen = busiest_best_prio == busiest->curr->prio;
>>
>> @@ -2108,9 +2111,10 @@ skip_queue:
>> */
>> skip_for_load = tmp->load_weight > rem_load_move;
>> if (skip_for_load && idx < this_best_prio)
>> - skip_for_load = busiest_best_prio_seen || idx != busiest_best_prio;
>> + skip_for_load = !busiest_best_prio_seen && idx == busiest_best_prio;
>
> I think we need to change this to
> if (skip_for_load && idx < this_best_prio && idx == busiest_best_prio)
> skip_for_load = !busiest_best_prio_seen;
>
> Otherwise we will reset skip_for_load to '0' even for the tasks whose prio is
> less than this_best_prio but not equal to busiest_best_prio.

And why is that a problem? The intention of this code is to make sure
at least one busiest_best_prio task doesn't get moved as a result of the
"skip for reasons of load weight" mechanism being overridden by the "idx
< this_best_prio" exception. I can't see how this intention is being
subverted.

Peter
--
Peter Williams pwil3058@bigpond.net.au

"Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious."
-- Ambrose Bierce
-
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: 2006-04-26 01:25    [W:0.057 / U:0.388 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site