Hello, Peter. On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 12:23:31PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > This reminds me, I think we have a bug here... > > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240422094157.GA34453@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > I *think* we want something like the below, hmm? > > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c > index 0935f9d4bb7b..32a40d85c0b1 100644 > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c > @@ -1328,15 +1328,15 @@ int tg_nop(struct task_group *tg, void *data) > void set_load_weight(struct task_struct *p, bool update_load) > { > int prio = p->static_prio - MAX_RT_PRIO; > - struct load_weight *load = &p->se.load; > + unsigned long weight; > + u32 inv_weight; > > - /* > - * SCHED_IDLE tasks get minimal weight: > - */ > if (task_has_idle_policy(p)) { > - load->weight = scale_load(WEIGHT_IDLEPRIO); > - load->inv_weight = WMULT_IDLEPRIO; > - return; > + weight = scale_load(WEIGHT_IDLEPRIO); > + inv_weight = WMULT_IDLEPRIO; > + } else { > + weight = scale_load(sched_prio_to_weight[prio]); > + inv_weight = sched_prio_to_wmult[prio]; Hmmm... sorry but I'm a bit confused again. Isn't the code doing the same thing before and after? Before, if @p is SCHED_IDLE, @p->se.load is set to idle values and the function returns. If @update_load && fair, calls reweight_task(). Otherwise, update @p->se.load is updated according to @prio. After the patch, @weight and @inv_weight calcuations are moved to set_load_weight() but it ends up with the same result for all three cases. Were you trying to say that if the idle policy were to implement ->reweight_task(), it wouldn't be called? Thanks. -- tejun
