From: Quentin Perret <qperret@google•com>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel•org>
Cc: linux-arch@vger•kernel.org, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel•org>,
kernel-team@android•com,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro•org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat•com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat•com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead•org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm•com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg•org>,
linux-kernel@vger•kernel.org, Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm•com>,
Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei•com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation•org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel•org>, Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google•com>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm•com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists•infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 07/14] sched: Introduce restrict_cpus_allowed_ptr() to limit task CPU affinity
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 09:18:20 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201119091820.GA2416649@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201113093720.21106-8-will@kernel.org>
Hey Will,
On Friday 13 Nov 2020 at 09:37:12 (+0000), Will Deacon wrote:
> -static int __set_cpus_allowed_ptr(struct task_struct *p,
> - const struct cpumask *new_mask, bool check)
> +static int __set_cpus_allowed_ptr_locked(struct task_struct *p,
> + const struct cpumask *new_mask,
> + bool check,
> + struct rq *rq,
> + struct rq_flags *rf)
> {
> const struct cpumask *cpu_valid_mask = cpu_active_mask;
> unsigned int dest_cpu;
> - struct rq_flags rf;
> - struct rq *rq;
> int ret = 0;
Should we have a lockdep assertion here?
> - rq = task_rq_lock(p, &rf);
> update_rq_clock(rq);
>
> if (p->flags & PF_KTHREAD) {
> @@ -1929,7 +1923,7 @@ static int __set_cpus_allowed_ptr(struct task_struct *p,
> if (task_running(rq, p) || p->state == TASK_WAKING) {
> struct migration_arg arg = { p, dest_cpu };
> /* Need help from migration thread: drop lock and wait. */
> - task_rq_unlock(rq, p, &rf);
> + task_rq_unlock(rq, p, rf);
> stop_one_cpu(cpu_of(rq), migration_cpu_stop, &arg);
> return 0;
> } else if (task_on_rq_queued(p)) {
> @@ -1937,20 +1931,69 @@ static int __set_cpus_allowed_ptr(struct task_struct *p,
> * OK, since we're going to drop the lock immediately
> * afterwards anyway.
> */
> - rq = move_queued_task(rq, &rf, p, dest_cpu);
> + rq = move_queued_task(rq, rf, p, dest_cpu);
> }
> out:
> - task_rq_unlock(rq, p, &rf);
> + task_rq_unlock(rq, p, rf);
And that's a little odd to have here no? Can we move it back on the
caller's side?
> return ret;
> }
Thanks,
Quentin
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists•infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-19 9:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-13 9:37 [PATCH v3 00/14] An alternative series for asymmetric AArch32 systems Will Deacon
2020-11-13 9:37 ` [PATCH v3 01/14] arm64: cpuinfo: Split AArch32 registers out into a separate struct Will Deacon
2020-11-13 9:37 ` [PATCH v3 02/14] arm64: Allow mismatched 32-bit EL0 support Will Deacon
2020-11-19 11:27 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-11-19 13:12 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-13 9:37 ` [PATCH v3 03/14] KVM: arm64: Kill 32-bit vCPUs on systems with mismatched " Will Deacon
2020-11-13 9:37 ` [PATCH v3 04/14] arm64: Kill 32-bit applications scheduled on 64-bit-only CPUs Will Deacon
2020-11-13 9:37 ` [PATCH v3 05/14] arm64: Advertise CPUs capable of running 32-bit applications in sysfs Will Deacon
2020-11-13 9:37 ` [PATCH v3 06/14] arm64: Hook up cmdline parameter to allow mismatched 32-bit EL0 Will Deacon
2020-11-13 9:37 ` [PATCH v3 07/14] sched: Introduce restrict_cpus_allowed_ptr() to limit task CPU affinity Will Deacon
2020-11-19 9:18 ` Quentin Perret [this message]
2020-11-19 11:03 ` Quentin Perret
2020-11-19 11:05 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-19 11:27 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-11-19 13:13 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-19 14:54 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-11-19 16:41 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-19 12:47 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-11-19 13:13 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-19 14:54 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-11-19 16:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-11-19 16:57 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-11-19 19:25 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-13 9:37 ` [PATCH v3 08/14] arm64: exec: Adjust affinity for compat tasks with mismatched 32-bit EL0 Will Deacon
2020-11-19 9:24 ` Quentin Perret
2020-11-19 11:06 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-19 16:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-11-19 16:30 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-19 16:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-11-19 16:51 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-19 16:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-11-19 16:28 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-19 16:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-11-19 16:48 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-13 9:37 ` [PATCH v3 09/14] cpuset: Don't use the cpu_possible_mask as a last resort for cgroup v1 Will Deacon
2020-11-19 9:29 ` Quentin Perret
2020-11-19 11:06 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-13 9:37 ` [PATCH v3 10/14] sched: Introduce arch_cpu_allowed_mask() to limit fallback rq selection Will Deacon
2020-11-19 9:38 ` Quentin Perret
2020-11-19 11:07 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-19 20:39 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-23 14:48 ` Quentin Perret
2020-11-13 9:37 ` [PATCH v3 11/14] sched: Reject CPU affinity changes based on arch_cpu_allowed_mask() Will Deacon
2020-11-19 9:47 ` Quentin Perret
2020-11-19 11:07 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-19 14:30 ` Quentin Perret
2020-11-19 16:44 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-13 9:37 ` [PATCH v3 12/14] arm64: Prevent offlining first CPU with 32-bit EL0 on mismatched system Will Deacon
2020-11-13 9:37 ` [PATCH v3 13/14] arm64: Implement arch_cpu_allowed_mask() Will Deacon
2020-11-13 9:37 ` [PATCH v3 14/14] arm64: Remove logic to kill 32-bit tasks on 64-bit-only cores Will Deacon
2020-11-19 16:11 ` [PATCH v3 00/14] An alternative series for asymmetric AArch32 systems Peter Zijlstra
2020-11-19 16:39 ` Will Deacon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20201119091820.GA2416649@google.com \
--to=qperret@google$(echo .)com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm$(echo .)com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation$(echo .)org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg$(echo .)org \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat$(echo .)com \
--cc=kernel-team@android$(echo .)com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists$(echo .)infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=lizefan@huawei$(echo .)com \
--cc=maz@kernel$(echo .)org \
--cc=mingo@redhat$(echo .)com \
--cc=morten.rasmussen@arm$(echo .)com \
--cc=peterz@infradead$(echo .)org \
--cc=qais.yousef@arm$(echo .)com \
--cc=surenb@google$(echo .)com \
--cc=tj@kernel$(echo .)org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro$(echo .)org \
--cc=will@kernel$(echo .)org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox