sched: Guarantee task priority in pick_next_task()
Michael spotted that the idle_balance() push down created a task
priority problem.
Previously, when we called idle_balance() before pick_next_task() it
wasn't a problem when -- because of the rq->lock droppage -- an rt/dl
task slipped in.
Similarly for pre_schedule(), rt pre-schedule could have a dl task
slip in.
But by pulling it into the pick_next_task() loop, we'll not try a
higher task priority again.
Cure this by creating a re-start condition in pick_next_task(); and
triggering this from pick_next_task_{rt,fair}().
It also fixes a live-lock where we get stuck in pick_next_task_fair()
due to idle_balance() seeing !0 nr_running but there not actually
being any fair tasks about.
Reported-by: Michael Wang <wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Fixes: 38033c37fa ("sched: Push down pre_schedule() and idle_balance()")
Tested-by: Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@gmail.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20140224121218.GR15586@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
This commit is contained in:
committed by
Ingo Molnar
parent
06d50c65b1
commit
37e117c07b
@@ -1360,8 +1360,16 @@ pick_next_task_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev)
|
||||
struct task_struct *p;
|
||||
struct rt_rq *rt_rq = &rq->rt;
|
||||
|
||||
if (need_pull_rt_task(rq, prev))
|
||||
if (need_pull_rt_task(rq, prev)) {
|
||||
pull_rt_task(rq);
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* pull_rt_task() can drop (and re-acquire) rq->lock; this
|
||||
* means a dl task can slip in, in which case we need to
|
||||
* re-start task selection.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
if (unlikely(rq->dl.dl_nr_running))
|
||||
return RETRY_TASK;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
if (!rt_rq->rt_nr_running)
|
||||
return NULL;
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user