Re: On migrate_disable() and latencies
From: Thomas Gleixner <hidden>
Date: 2011-07-28 07:01:35
Also in:
lkml
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011, Yong Zhang wrote:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 11:30:08AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:quoted
o Tasks awakening outside of migrate-disable regions will pick the CPU running the lowest-priority task, whether or not this task is in migrate-disable state. (At least I don't see anything in 3.0-rt3 that looks like a scheduling decision based on ->migrate_disable, perhaps due to blindness.)I'm also confused here, seems we just disable migration for RT task. migrate_disable() { ... if (p->sched_class->set_cpus_allowed) p->sched_class->set_cpus_allowed(p, mask); p->rt.nr_cpus_allowed = cpumask_weight(mask); ... } Shouldn't we also forbid migration on !RT task?
We do. Just RT is the only sched class which has a set_cpus_allowed()
callback implemented and want's an update to its rt.nr_cpus_allowed
field.
if (!p->migrate_disable) {
if (p->sched_class && p->sched_class->set_cpus_allowed)
p->sched_class->set_cpus_allowed(p, new_mask);
p->rt.nr_cpus_allowed = cpumask_weight(new_mask);
}
The general part is here:
cpumask_copy(&p->cpus_allowed, new_mask);
And tsk_cpus_allowed() does:
{
if (p->migrate_disable)
return cpumask_of(task_cpu(p));
return &p->cpus_allowed;
}
which is the relevant information to keep any task independent of it's
sched class pinned.
Thanks,
tglx