Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1590158
| From | Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] sched/rt: Document why has_pushable_tasks() isn't called with a runqueue lock |
| Date | 2017-03-01 11:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tg9d9-1fv-37@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <tfZx7-2KR-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 04:48:56PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> + /*
> + * Normally, has_pushable_tasks() would be performed within the
> + * runqueue lock being held. But if it was not set when entering
"not set" what? I'm having trouble parsing this.
> + * this hard interrupt handler function, then to have it set would
> + * require a wake up. A wake up of an RT task will either cause a
> + * schedule if the woken task is higher priority than the running
> + * task, or it would try to do a push from the CPU doing the wake
> + * up. Grabbing the runqueue lock in such a case would more likely
> + * just cause unnecessary contention.
> + */
> if (has_pushable_tasks(rq)) {
> raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock);
> push_rt_task(rq);
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH] sched/rt: Document why has_pushable_tasks() isn't called with a runqueue lock Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> - 2017-03-01 00:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH] sched/rt: Document why has_pushable_tasks() isn't called with a runqueue lock Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-03-01 11:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH] sched/rt: Document why has_pushable_tasks() isn't called with a runqueue lock Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> - 2017-03-02 21:50 +0100
csiph-web