lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Nov]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: NULL pointer dereference in pick_next_task_fair
On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 12:55:57PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -3929,13 +3929,14 @@ pick_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct tas
> }
>
> 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);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
/*
* We must do the balancing pass before put_next_task(), such
* that when we release the rq->lock the task is in the same
* state as before we took rq->lock.
*
* We can terminate the balance pass as soon as we know there is
* a runnable task of @class priority or higher.
*/
> + for_class_range(class, prev->sched_class, &idle_sched_class) {
> + if (class->balance(rq, prev, rf))
> + break;
> + }
> +#endif
> +
> + put_prev_task(rq, prev);
>
> for_each_class(class) {
> p = class->pick_next_task(rq, NULL, NULL);

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-11-08 13:53    [W:0.100 / U:41.692 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site