lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Jul]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] sched: Enforce order of leaf CFS runqueues
From
Date
On Mon, 2011-07-18 at 16:24 -0700, Paul Turner wrote:

> Subject: [PATCH] sched: handle on_list ancestor in leaf_add_cfs_rq()
> From: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>
> Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 16:08:10 -0700
>
> Jan H. Schönherr found that in the case of an on_list ancestor we may
> incorrectly place the child to the right of a great-ancestor on the list.
>
> Consider:
>
> A
> / \ Here, t1A results in A->cfs_rq being on_list, however when
> B t1A we start enqueuing from C this will not be visible. This is
> / compounded by the fact that on_list expiration may also be out
> C of order, punching holes in the tree.
> /
> t1C
>
> Prevent this by making additions to the leaf_cfs_rq_list position independent.
> This is done by maintaining additions to this list within the
> enqueue_task_fair() path, which allows us to always enqueue against the
> current entity's first on_list ancestor.

The problem I have with this is that it makes the enqueue more
expensive. We're now optimizing a relatively slow path (load-balance) at
the cost of the hottest path in the kernel (enqueue/dequeue).


--
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: 2011-07-19 15:11    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans