Re: [PATCH] sched: Simplify cpu-hot-unplug task migration

From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Wed Nov 17 2010 - 14:43:42 EST


On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 20:27 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Peter, sorry for delay.
>
> I was going to read this patch carefully today, but due to the holiday
> in the Czech Republic I have to drink (too much) beer instead ;)
>
> This means you should probably ignore my question, but can't resist...
>
> > -static void migrate_dead_tasks(unsigned int dead_cpu)
> > -{
> > - struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(dead_cpu);
> > - struct task_struct *next;
> > + rq->stop = NULL;
>
> (or we could do current->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIPLE, afaics)

Ah, you missed a patch that made pick_next_task_stop() look like:

static struct task_struct *pick_next_task_stop(struct rq *rq)
{
struct task_struct *stop = rq->stop;

if (stop && stop->se.on_rq)
return stop;

return NULL;
}

> > for ( ; ; ) {
> > - if (!rq->nr_running)
> > + /*
> > + * There's this thread running, bail when that's the only
> > + * remaining thread.
> > + */
> > + if (rq->nr_running == 1)
> > break;
>
> I was very much confused, and I was going to say this is wrong.
> However, now I think this is correct, just the comment is not
> right.
>
> There is another running thread we should not migrate, rq->idle.
> If nothing else, dequeue_task_idle() should be never called.

In fact, dequeue_task_idle() will yell if you try that ;-)

> But, if I understand correctly, ->nr_running does not account
> the idle thread, and this is what makes this correct.
>
> Correct?

Right, I can add: (the idle thread is not counted in nr_running), if
that makes things clearer for you; however its a quite fundamental
property, we don't consider the idle task a proper runnable entity, its
simply the thing we do when there's nothing else to do.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/