28 Jun, 2006
40 commits
-
Make struct proc_ipmi_root static.
Besides this, tremove removes an unused #ifdef CONFIG_PROC_FS from
include/linux/ipmi.h.Acked-by: Corey Minyard
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Remove redundant NULL chck before kfree + tiny CodingStyle cleanup for
drivers/Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Remove redundant kfree NULL checks from kernel/
Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Remove redundant NULL checks before kfree for fs/
Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl
Acked-by: Mark Fasheh
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
In futex_requeue(), when the 2 futexes keys hash to the same bucket, there
is no need to move the futex_q to the end of the bucket list.Signed-off-by: Sebastien Dugue
Cc: Ingo Molnar
Cc: Thomas Gleixner
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
When the priority of a task, which is blocked on a lock, changes we must
propagate this change into the PI lock chain. Therefor the chain walk code
is changed to get rid of the references to current to avoid false positives
in the deadlock detector, as setscheduler might be called by a task which
holds the lock on which the task whose priority is changed is blocked.Also add some comments about the get/put_task_struct usage to avoid
confusion.Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar
Cc: Steven Rostedt
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Make test suite setscheduler calls asynchronously. Remove the waits in the
test cases and add a new testcase to verify the correctness of the
setscheduler priority propagation.Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
There is no need to hold tasklist_lock across the setscheduler call, when
we pin the task structure with get_task_struct(). Interrupts are disabled
in setscheduler anyway and the permission checks do not need interrupts
disabled.Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar
Cc: Steven Rostedt
Cc: Nick Piggin
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Fix defaults and dependencies.
Signed-off-by: Roman Zippel
Cc: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: Ingo Molnar
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
This adds the actual pi-futex implementation, based on rt-mutexes.
[dino@in.ibm.com: fix an oops-causing race]
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Signed-off-by: Arjan van de Ven
Signed-off-by: Dinakar Guniguntala
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Add proxy-locking rt-mutex functionality needed by pi-futexes.
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Signed-off-by: Arjan van de Ven
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
RT-mutex tester: scriptable tester for rt mutexes, which allows userspace
scripting of mutex unit-tests (and dynamic tests as well), using the actual
rt-mutex implementation of the kernel.[akpm@osdl.org: fixlet]
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar
Signed-off-by: Arjan van de Ven
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Runtime debugging functionality for rt-mutexes.
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Signed-off-by: Arjan van de Ven
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Add rt-mutex documentation.
[rostedt@goodmis.org: Update rt-mutex-design.txt as per Randy Dunlap suggestions]
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Signed-off-by: Arjan van de Ven
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt
Cc: "Randy.Dunlap"
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Core functions for the rt-mutex subsystem.
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Signed-off-by: Arjan van de Ven
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Add framework to boost/unboost the priority of RT tasks.
This consists of:
- caching the 'normal' priority in ->normal_prio
- providing a functions to set/get the priority of the task
- make sched_setscheduler() aware of boostingThe effective_prio() cleanups also fix a priority-calculation bug pointed out
by Andrey Gelman, in set_user_nice().has_rt_policy() fix: Peter Williams
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Signed-off-by: Arjan van de Ven
Cc: Andrey Gelman
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Add the priority-sorted list (plist) implementation.
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Signed-off-by: Arjan van de Ven
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Introduce a new WARN_ON variant: WARN_ON_SMP(cond).
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Add debug_check_no_locks_freed(), as a central inline to add
bad-lock-free-debugging functionality to.Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Signed-off-by: Arjan van de Ven
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Fix typo in Documentation/robust-futexes.txt.
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
We are pleased to announce "lightweight userspace priority inheritance" (PI)
support for futexes. The following patchset and glibc patch implements it,
ontop of the robust-futexes patchset which is included in 2.6.16-mm1.We are calling it lightweight for 3 reasons:
- in the user-space fastpath a PI-enabled futex involves no kernel work
(or any other PI complexity) at all. No registration, no extra kernel
calls - just pure fast atomic ops in userspace.- in the slowpath (in the lock-contention case), the system call and
scheduling pattern is in fact better than that of normal futexes, due to
the 'integrated' nature of FUTEX_LOCK_PI. [more about that further down]- the in-kernel PI implementation is streamlined around the mutex
abstraction, with strict rules that keep the implementation relatively
simple: only a single owner may own a lock (i.e. no read-write lock
support), only the owner may unlock a lock, no recursive locking, etc.Priority Inheritance - why, oh why???
-------------------------------------Many of you heard the horror stories about the evil PI code circling Linux for
years, which makes no real sense at all and is only used by buggy applications
and which has horrible overhead. Some of you have dreaded this very moment,
when someone actually submits working PI code ;-)So why would we like to see PI support for futexes?
We'd like to see it done purely for technological reasons. We dont think it's
a buggy concept, we think it's useful functionality to offer to applications,
which functionality cannot be achieved in other ways. We also think it's the
right thing to do, and we think we've got the right arguments and the right
numbers to prove that. We also believe that we can address all the
counter-arguments as well. For these reasons (and the reasons outlined below)
we are submitting this patch-set for upstream kernel inclusion.What are the benefits of PI?
The short reply:
----------------User-space PI helps achieving/improving determinism for user-space
applications. In the best-case, it can help achieve determinism and
well-bound latencies. Even in the worst-case, PI will improve the statistical
distribution of locking related application delays.The longer reply:
-----------------Firstly, sharing locks between multiple tasks is a common programming
technique that often cannot be replaced with lockless algorithms. As we can
see it in the kernel [which is a quite complex program in itself], lockless
structures are rather the exception than the norm - the current ratio of
lockless vs. locky code for shared data structures is somewhere between 1:10
and 1:100. Lockless is hard, and the complexity of lockless algorithms often
endangers to ability to do robust reviews of said code. I.e. critical RT
apps often choose lock structures to protect critical data structures, instead
of lockless algorithms. Furthermore, there are cases (like shared hardware,
or other resource limits) where lockless access is mathematically impossible.Media players (such as Jack) are an example of reasonable application design
with multiple tasks (with multiple priority levels) sharing short-held locks:
for example, a highprio audio playback thread is combined with medium-prio
construct-audio-data threads and low-prio display-colory-stuff threads. Add
video and decoding to the mix and we've got even more priority levels.So once we accept that synchronization objects (locks) are an unavoidable fact
of life, and once we accept that multi-task userspace apps have a very fair
expectation of being able to use locks, we've got to think about how to offer
the option of a deterministic locking implementation to user-space.Most of the technical counter-arguments against doing priority inheritance
only apply to kernel-space locks. But user-space locks are different, there
we cannot disable interrupts or make the task non-preemptible in a critical
section, so the 'use spinlocks' argument does not apply (user-space spinlocks
have the same priority inversion problems as other user-space locking
constructs). Fact is, pretty much the only technique that currently enables
good determinism for userspace locks (such as futex-based pthread mutexes) is
priority inheritance:Currently (without PI), if a high-prio and a low-prio task shares a lock [this
is a quite common scenario for most non-trivial RT applications], even if all
critical sections are coded carefully to be deterministic (i.e. all critical
sections are short in duration and only execute a limited number of
instructions), the kernel cannot guarantee any deterministic execution of the
high-prio task: any medium-priority task could preempt the low-prio task while
it holds the shared lock and executes the critical section, and could delay it
indefinitely.Implementation:
---------------As mentioned before, the userspace fastpath of PI-enabled pthread mutexes
involves no kernel work at all - they behave quite similarly to normal
futex-based locks: a 0 value means unlocked, and a value==TID means locked.
(This is the same method as used by list-based robust futexes.) Userspace uses
atomic ops to lock/unlock these mutexes without entering the kernel.To handle the slowpath, we have added two new futex ops:
FUTEX_LOCK_PI
FUTEX_UNLOCK_PIIf the lock-acquire fastpath fails, [i.e. an atomic transition from 0 to TID
fails], then FUTEX_LOCK_PI is called. The kernel does all the remaining work:
if there is no futex-queue attached to the futex address yet then the code
looks up the task that owns the futex [it has put its own TID into the futex
value], and attaches a 'PI state' structure to the futex-queue. The pi_state
includes an rt-mutex, which is a PI-aware, kernel-based synchronization
object. The 'other' task is made the owner of the rt-mutex, and the
FUTEX_WAITERS bit is atomically set in the futex value. Then this task tries
to lock the rt-mutex, on which it blocks. Once it returns, it has the mutex
acquired, and it sets the futex value to its own TID and returns. Userspace
has no other work to perform - it now owns the lock, and futex value contains
FUTEX_WAITERS|TID.If the unlock side fastpath succeeds, [i.e. userspace manages to do a TID ->
0 atomic transition of the futex value], then no kernel work is triggered.If the unlock fastpath fails (because the FUTEX_WAITERS bit is set), then
FUTEX_UNLOCK_PI is called, and the kernel unlocks the futex on the behalf of
userspace - and it also unlocks the attached pi_state->rt_mutex and thus wakes
up any potential waiters.Note that under this approach, contrary to other PI-futex approaches, there is
no prior 'registration' of a PI-futex. [which is not quite possible anyway,
due to existing ABI properties of pthread mutexes.]Also, under this scheme, 'robustness' and 'PI' are two orthogonal properties
of futexes, and all four combinations are possible: futex, robust-futex,
PI-futex, robust+PI-futex.glibc support:
--------------Ulrich Drepper and Jakub Jelinek have written glibc support for PI-futexes
(and robust futexes), enabling robust and PI (PTHREAD_PRIO_INHERIT) POSIX
mutexes. (PTHREAD_PRIO_PROTECT support will be added later on too, no
additional kernel changes are needed for that). [NOTE: The glibc patch is
obviously inofficial and unsupported without matching upstream kernel
functionality.]the patch-queue and the glibc patch can also be downloaded from:
http://redhat.com/~mingo/PI-futex-patches/
Many thanks go to the people who helped us create this kernel feature: Steven
Rostedt, Esben Nielsen, Benedikt Spranger, Daniel Walker, John Cooper, Arjan
van de Ven, Oleg Nesterov and others. Credits for related prior projects goes
to Dirk Grambow, Inaky Perez-Gonzalez, Bill Huey and many others.Clean up the futex code, before adding more features to it:
- use u32 as the futex field type - that's the ABI
- use __user and pointers to u32 instead of unsigned long
- code style / comment style cleanups
- rename hash-bucket name from 'bh' to 'hb'.I checked the pre and post futex.o object files to make sure this
patch has no code effects.Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Signed-off-by: Arjan van de Ven
Cc: Ulrich Drepper
Cc: Jakub Jelinek
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Thomas Gleixner is adding the call to a rtmutex function in setscheduler.
This call grabs a spin_lock that is not always protected by interrupts
disabled. So this means that setscheduler cant be called from interrupt
context.To prevent this from happening in the future, this patch adds a
BUG_ON(in_interrupt()) in that function. (Thanks to akpm for this suggestion).Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt
Cc: Ingo Molnar
Cc: Thomas Gleixner
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Saves 543 bytes from sched.o (gcc 3.3.3).
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov
Cc: Ingo Molnar
Cc: Nick Piggin
Cc: Con Kolivas
Cc: Peter Williams
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
sysfs entries 'sched_mc_power_savings' and 'sched_smt_power_savings' in
/sys/devices/system/cpu/ control the MC/SMT power savings policy for the
scheduler.Based on the values (1-enable, 0-disable) for these controls, sched groups
cpu power will be determined for different domains. When power savings
policy is enabled and under light load conditions, scheduler will minimize
the physical packages/cpu cores carrying the load and thus conserving
power(with a perf impact based on the workload characteristics... see OLS
2005 CMP kernel scheduler paper for more details..)Signed-off-by: Suresh Siddha
Cc: Ingo Molnar
Cc: Nick Piggin
Cc: Con Kolivas
Cc: "Chen, Kenneth W"
Cc: "David S. Miller"
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
As explained here:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=114327539012323&w=2there is a problem with sharing sched_group structures between two
separate sched_group structures for different sched_domains.The patch has been tested and found to avoid the kernel lockup problem
described in above URL.Signed-off-by: Srivatsa Vaddagiri
Cc: Nick Piggin
Cc: Ingo Molnar
Cc: "Siddha, Suresh B"
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
The sched group structures used to represent various nodes need to be
allocated from respective nodes (as suggested here also:http://uwsg.ucs.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0603.3/0051.html)
Signed-off-by: Srivatsa Vaddagiri
Cc: Nick Piggin
Cc: Ingo Molnar
Cc: "Siddha, Suresh B"
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Replace GFP_ATOMIC allocation for sched_group_nodes with GFP_KERNEL based
allocation.Signed-off-by: Srivatsa Vaddagiri
Cc: Ingo Molnar
Cc: "Siddha, Suresh B"
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Try to handle mem allocation failures in build_sched_domains by bailing out
and cleaning up thus-far allocated memory. The patch has a direct consequence
that we disable load balancing completely (even at sibling level) upon *any*
memory allocation failure.[Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com: bugfix]
Signed-off-by: Srivatsa Vaddagir
Cc: Nick Piggin
Cc: Ingo Molnar
Cc: "Siddha, Suresh B"
Signed-off-by: Lee Schermerhorn
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Problem:
To help distribute high priority tasks evenly across the available CPUs
move_tasks() does not, under some circumstances, skip tasks whose load
weight is bigger than the designated amount. Because the highest priority
task on the busiest queue may be on the expired array it may be moved as a
result of this mechanism. Apart from not being the most desirable way to
redistribute the high priority tasks (we'd rather move the second highest
priority task), there is a risk that this could set up a loop with this
task bouncing backwards and forwards between the two queues. (This latter
possibility can be demonstrated by running a nice==-20 CPU bound task on an
otherwise quiet 2 CPU system.)Solution:
Modify the mechanism so that it does not override skip for the highest
priority task on the CPU. Of course, if there are more than one tasks at
the highest priority then it will allow the override for one of them as
this is a desirable redistribution of high priority tasks.Signed-off-by: Peter Williams
Cc: Ingo Molnar
Cc: "Siddha, Suresh B"
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Problem:
The move_tasks() function is designed to move UP TO the amount of load it
is asked to move and in doing this it skips over tasks looking for ones
whose load weights are less than or equal to the remaining load to be
moved. This is (in general) a good thing but it has the unfortunate result
of breaking one of the original load balancer's good points: namely, that
(within the limits imposed by the active/expired array model and the fact
the expired is processed first) it moves high priority tasks before low
priority ones and this means there's a good chance (see active/expired
problem for why it's only a chance) that the highest priority task on the
queue but not actually on the CPU will be moved to the other CPU where (as
a high priority task) it may preempt the current task.Solution:
Modify move_tasks() so that high priority tasks are not skipped when moving
them will make them the highest priority task on their new run queue.Signed-off-by: Peter Williams
Cc: Ingo Molnar
Cc: "Siddha, Suresh B"
Cc: "Chen, Kenneth W"
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Problem:
The introduction of separate run queues per CPU has brought with it "nice"
enforcement problems that are best described by a simple example.For the sake of argument suppose that on a single CPU machine with a
nice==19 hard spinner and a nice==0 hard spinner running that the nice==0
task gets 95% of the CPU and the nice==19 task gets 5% of the CPU. Now
suppose that there is a system with 2 CPUs and 2 nice==19 hard spinners and
2 nice==0 hard spinners running. The user of this system would be entitled
to expect that the nice==0 tasks each get 95% of a CPU and the nice==19
tasks only get 5% each. However, whether this expectation is met is pretty
much down to luck as there are four equally likely distributions of the
tasks to the CPUs that the load balancing code will consider to be balanced
with loads of 2.0 for each CPU. Two of these distributions involve one
nice==0 and one nice==19 task per CPU and in these circumstances the users
expectations will be met. The other two distributions both involve both
nice==0 tasks being on one CPU and both nice==19 being on the other CPU and
each task will get 50% of a CPU and the user's expectations will not be
met.Solution:
The solution to this problem that is implemented in the attached patch is
to use weighted loads when determining if the system is balanced and, when
an imbalance is detected, to move an amount of weighted load between run
queues (as opposed to a number of tasks) to restore the balance. Once
again, the easiest way to explain why both of these measures are necessary
is to use a simple example. Suppose that (in a slight variation of the
above example) that we have a two CPU system with 4 nice==0 and 4 nice=19
hard spinning tasks running and that the 4 nice==0 tasks are on one CPU and
the 4 nice==19 tasks are on the other CPU. The weighted loads for the two
CPUs would be 4.0 and 0.2 respectively and the load balancing code would
move 2 tasks resulting in one CPU with a load of 2.0 and the other with
load of 2.2. If this was considered to be a big enough imbalance to
justify moving a task and that task was moved using the current
move_tasks() then it would move the highest priority task that it found and
this would result in one CPU with a load of 3.0 and the other with a load
of 1.2 which would result in the movement of a task in the opposite
direction and so on -- infinite loop. If, on the other hand, an amount of
load to be moved is calculated from the imbalance (in this case 0.1) and
move_tasks() skips tasks until it find ones whose contributions to the
weighted load are less than this amount it would move two of the nice==19
tasks resulting in a system with 2 nice==0 and 2 nice=19 on each CPU with
loads of 2.1 for each CPU.One of the advantages of this mechanism is that on a system where all tasks
have nice==0 the load balancing calculations would be mathematically
identical to the current load balancing code.Notes:
struct task_struct:
has a new field load_weight which (in a trade off of space for speed)
stores the contribution that this task makes to a CPU's weighted load when
it is runnable.struct runqueue:
has a new field raw_weighted_load which is the sum of the load_weight
values for the currently runnable tasks on this run queue. This field
always needs to be updated when nr_running is updated so two new inline
functions inc_nr_running() and dec_nr_running() have been created to make
sure that this happens. This also offers a convenient way to optimize away
this part of the smpnice mechanism when CONFIG_SMP is not defined.int try_to_wake_up():
in this function the value SCHED_LOAD_BALANCE is used to represent the load
contribution of a single task in various calculations in the code that
decides which CPU to put the waking task on. While this would be a valid
on a system where the nice values for the runnable tasks were distributed
evenly around zero it will lead to anomalous load balancing if the
distribution is skewed in either direction. To overcome this problem
SCHED_LOAD_SCALE has been replaced by the load_weight for the relevant task
or by the average load_weight per task for the queue in question (as
appropriate).int move_tasks():
The modifications to this function were complicated by the fact that
active_load_balance() uses it to move exactly one task without checking
whether an imbalance actually exists. This precluded the simple
overloading of max_nr_move with max_load_move and necessitated the addition
of the latter as an extra argument to the function. The internal
implementation is then modified to move up to max_nr_move tasks and
max_load_move of weighted load. This slightly complicates the code where
move_tasks() is called and if ever active_load_balance() is changed to not
use move_tasks() the implementation of move_tasks() should be simplified
accordingly.struct sched_group *find_busiest_group():
Similar to try_to_wake_up(), there are places in this function where
SCHED_LOAD_SCALE is used to represent the load contribution of a single
task and the same issues are created. A similar solution is adopted except
that it is now the average per task contribution to a group's load (as
opposed to a run queue) that is required. As this value is not directly
available from the group it is calculated on the fly as the queues in the
groups are visited when determining the busiest group.A key change to this function is that it is no longer to scale down
*imbalance on exit as move_tasks() uses the load in its scaled form.void set_user_nice():
has been modified to update the task's load_weight field when it's nice
value and also to ensure that its run queue's raw_weighted_load field is
updated if it was runnable.From: "Siddha, Suresh B"
With smpnice, sched groups with highest priority tasks can mask the imbalance
between the other sched groups with in the same domain. This patch fixes some
of the listed down scenarios by not considering the sched groups which are
lightly loaded.a) on a simple 4-way MP system, if we have one high priority and 4 normal
priority tasks, with smpnice we would like to see the high priority task
scheduled on one cpu, two other cpus getting one normal task each and the
fourth cpu getting the remaining two normal tasks. but with current
smpnice extra normal priority task keeps jumping from one cpu to another
cpu having the normal priority task. This is because of the
busiest_has_loaded_cpus, nr_loaded_cpus logic.. We are not including the
cpu with high priority task in max_load calculations but including that in
total and avg_load calcuations.. leading to max_load < avg_load and load
balance between cpus running normal priority tasks(2 Vs 1) will always show
imbalanace as one normal priority and the extra normal priority task will
keep moving from one cpu to another cpu having normal priority task..b) 4-way system with HT (8 logical processors). Package-P0 T0 has a
highest priority task, T1 is idle. Package-P1 Both T0 and T1 have 1 normal
priority task each.. P2 and P3 are idle. With this patch, one of the
normal priority tasks on P1 will be moved to P2 or P3..c) With the current weighted smp nice calculations, it doesn't always make
sense to look at the highest weighted runqueue in the busy group..
Consider a load balance scenario on a DP with HT system, with Package-0
containing one high priority and one low priority, Package-1 containing one
low priority(with other thread being idle).. Package-1 thinks that it need
to take the low priority thread from Package-0. And find_busiest_queue()
returns the cpu thread with highest priority task.. And ultimately(with
help of active load balance) we move high priority task to Package-1. And
same continues with Package-0 now, moving high priority task from package-1
to package-0.. Even without the presence of active load balance, load
balance will fail to balance the above scenario.. Fix find_busiest_queue
to use "imbalance" when it is lightly loaded.[kernel@kolivas.org: sched: store weighted load on up]
[kernel@kolivas.org: sched: add discrete weighted cpu load function]
[suresh.b.siddha@intel.com: sched: remove dead code]
Signed-off-by: Peter Williams
Cc: "Siddha, Suresh B"
Cc: "Chen, Kenneth W"
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar
Cc: Nick Piggin
Signed-off-by: Con Kolivas
Cc: John Hawkes
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
There is a race between set_cpus_allowed() and move_task_off_dead_cpu().
__migrate_task() doesn't report any err code, so task can be left on its
runqueue if its cpus_allowed mask changed so that dest_cpu is not longer a
possible target. Also, chaning cpus_allowed mask requires rq->lock being
held.Signed-off-by: Kirill Korotaev
Acked-By: Ingo Molnar
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Unless we expect to have more than 2G CPUs, there's no reason to have 'i'
as a long long here.Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
The relationship between INTERACTIVE_SLEEP and the ceiling is not perfect
and not explicit enough. The sleep boost is not supposed to be any larger
than without this code and the comment is not clear enough about what
exactly it does, just the reason it does it. Fix it.There is a ceiling to the priority beyond which tasks that only ever sleep
for very long periods cannot surpass. Fix it.Prevent the on-runqueue bonus logic from defeating the idle sleep logic.
Opportunity to micro-optimise.
Signed-off-by: Con Kolivas
Signed-off-by: Mike Galbraith
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar
Signed-off-by: Ken Chen
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Initial report and lock contention fix from Chris Mason:
Recent benchmarks showed some performance regressions between 2.6.16 and
2.6.5. We tracked down one of the regressions to lock contention in
schedule heavy workloads (~70,000 context switches per second)kernel/sched.c:dependent_sleeper() was responsible for most of the lock
contention, hammering on the run queue locks. The patch below is more of a
discussion point than a suggested fix (although it does reduce lock
contention significantly). The dependent_sleeper code looks very expensive
to me, especially for using a spinlock to bounce control between two
different siblings in the same cpu.It is further optimized:
* perform dependent_sleeper check after next task is determined
* convert wake_sleeping_dependent to use trylock
* skip smt runqueue check if trylock fails
* optimize double_rq_lock now that smt nice is converted to trylock
* early exit in searching first SD_SHARE_CPUPOWER domain
* speedup fast path of dependent_sleeper[akpm@osdl.org: cleanup]
Signed-off-by: Ken Chen
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar
Acked-by: Con Kolivas
Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin
Acked-by: Chris Mason
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Replace the temp makefile hacks with proper CONFIG entries, which are also
added to Kconfig.Signed-off-by: Jim Cromie
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Add current pin settings to gpio_dump() output. This adds the last 'word' to
the syslog lines, which displays the input and output values that the pin is
set to.pc8736x_gpio.0: io00: 0x0044 TS OD PUE EDGE LO DEBOUNCE io:1/1
The 2 values may differ for a number of reasons:
1- the pin output circuitry is diaabled, (as the above 'TS' indicates)
2- it needs a pullup resistor to drive the attached circuit,
3- the external circuit needs a pullup so the open-drain has something
to pull-down
4- the pin is wired to Vcc or GroundIt might be appropriate to add a WARN for 2,3,4, since they could
damage the chip and/or circuit, esp if misconfig goes unnoticed.Signed-off-by: Jim Cromie
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Hmm. Im somewhat ambivalent about this patch, since with it, driver wont
build for vanilla 17 or older.Its also only 1/2 of your suggestion - when I tried it, I was building against
vanilla 17, and asm/uaccess.h cause compilation failure. Looking back, Im
perplexed as to why linux/io.h didnt cause same failure ?!?use linux/io.h rather than asm/io.h
Signed-off-by: Jim Cromie
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds -
Replace spinlocks guarding gpio config ops with mutexes. This is a me-too
patch, and is justifiable insofar as mutexes have stricter semantics and
better debugging support, so are preferred where they are applicable.Signed-off-by: Jim Cromie
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds
