Re: [PATCH v12 8/8] sched/fair: Add latency list

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 at 12:00, Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> On 3/2/23 1:20 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 at 19:48, shrikanth hegde <sshegde@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 2/24/23 3:04 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> >>> Add a rb tree for latency sensitive entities so we can schedule the most
> >>> sensitive one first even when it failed to preempt current at wakeup or
> >>> when it got quickly preempted by another entity of higher priority.
> >>>
> >>> In order to keep fairness, the latency is used once at wakeup to get a
> >>> minimum slice and not during the following scheduling slice to prevent
> >>> long running entity to got more running time than allocated to his nice
> >>> priority.
> >>>
> >>> The rb tree enables to cover the last corner case where latency
> >>> sensitive entity can't got schedule quickly after the wakeup.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>> Tested-by: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@xxxxxxx>
> >>> ---
> >>>  include/linux/sched.h |   1 +
> >>>  kernel/sched/core.c   |   1 +
> >>>  kernel/sched/fair.c   | 109 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> >>>  kernel/sched/sched.h  |   1 +
> >>>  4 files changed, 109 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> >>> index 38decae3e156..41bb92be5ecc 100644
> >>> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> >>> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> >>> @@ -548,6 +548,7 @@ struct sched_entity {
> >>>       /* For load-balancing: */
> >>>       struct load_weight              load;
> >>>       struct rb_node                  run_node;
> >>> +     struct rb_node                  latency_node;
> >> Ran pahole to see if the frequently accessed fields change across cachelines.
> >> There is no change in cachelines of task_struct, whereas sched_entity differs
> >> due to latency_node.  Maybe the latency_node could be placed after
> >> runnable_weight as there is space available in that cacheline.
> > I will run some test on my system to confimr your results but we can
> > move latency_node field if it helps cache hit stats
> >
> >>
> >> 6.2
> >> #pahole sched_entity
> >> struct sched_entity {
> >>         struct load_weight         load;                 /*     0    16 */
> >>
> >>         /* XXX last struct has 4 bytes of padding */
> >>
> >>         struct rb_node             run_node;             /*    16    24 */
> >>         struct list_head           group_node;           /*    40    16 */
> >>         unsigned int               on_rq;                /*    56     4 */
> >>
> >>         /* XXX 4 bytes hole, try to pack */
> >>
> >>         u64                        exec_start;           /*    64     8 */
> >>         u64                        sum_exec_runtime;     /*    72     8 */
> >>         u64                        vruntime;             /*    80     8 */
> >>         u64                        prev_sum_exec_runtime; /*    88     8 */
> >>         u64                        nr_migrations;        /*    96     8 */
> >>         int                        depth;                /*   104     4 */
> >>
> >>         /* XXX 4 bytes hole, try to pack */
> >>
> >>         struct sched_entity *      parent;               /*   112     8 */
> >>         struct cfs_rq *            cfs_rq;               /*   120     8 */
> >>         /* --- cacheline 1 boundary (128 bytes) --- */
> >>         struct cfs_rq *            my_q;                 /*   128     8 */
> >>         long unsigned int          runnable_weight;      /*   136     8 */
> >>
> >>         /* XXX 112 bytes hole, try to pack */
> >>
> >>         /* --- cacheline 2 boundary (256 bytes) --- */
> >>         struct sched_avg           avg;                  /*   256   128 */
> >>
> >>
> >> 6.2 + V12 patch
> >> #pahole sched_entity
> >> struct sched_entity {
> >>         struct load_weight         load;                 /*     0    16 */
> >>
> >>         /* XXX last struct has 4 bytes of padding */
> >>
> >>         struct rb_node             run_node;             /*    16    24 */
> >>         struct rb_node             latency_node;         /*    40    24 */
> >>         struct list_head           group_node;           /*    64    16 */
> >>         unsigned int               on_rq;                /*    80     4 */
> >>
> >>         /* XXX 4 bytes hole, try to pack */
> >>
> >>         u64                        exec_start;           /*    88     8 */
> >>         u64                        sum_exec_runtime;     /*    96     8 */
> >>         u64                        vruntime;             /*   104     8 */
> >>         u64                        prev_sum_exec_runtime; /*   112     8 */
> >>         u64                        nr_migrations;        /*   120     8 */
> >>         /* --- cacheline 1 boundary (128 bytes) --- */
> >>         int                        depth;                /*   128     4 */
> >>
> >>         /* XXX 4 bytes hole, try to pack */
> >>
> >>         struct sched_entity *      parent;               /*   136     8 */
> >>         struct cfs_rq *            cfs_rq;               /*   144     8 */
> >>         struct cfs_rq *            my_q;                 /*   152     8 */
> >>
> >>
> >> 6.2 + V12 patch + Re-shuffle of latency_node
> >> #pahole sched_entity
> >> struct sched_entity {
> >>         struct load_weight         load;                 /*     0    16 */
> >>
> >>         /* XXX last struct has 4 bytes of padding */
> >>
> >>         struct rb_node             run_node;             /*    16    24 */
> >>         struct list_head           group_node;           /*    40    16 */
> >>         unsigned int               on_rq;                /*    56     4 */
> >>
> >>         /* XXX 4 bytes hole, try to pack */
> >>
> >>         u64                        exec_start;           /*    64     8 */
> >>         u64                        sum_exec_runtime;     /*    72     8 */
> >>         u64                        vruntime;             /*    80     8 */
> >>         u64                        prev_sum_exec_runtime; /*    88     8 */
> >>         u64                        nr_migrations;        /*    96     8 */
> >>         int                        depth;                /*   104     4 */
> >>
> >>         /* XXX 4 bytes hole, try to pack */
> >>
> >>         struct sched_entity *      parent;               /*   112     8 */
> >>         struct cfs_rq *            cfs_rq;               /*   120     8 */
> >>         /* --- cacheline 1 boundary (128 bytes) --- */
> >>         struct cfs_rq *            my_q;                 /*   128     8 */
> >>         long unsigned int          runnable_weight;      /*   136     8 */
> >>         struct rb_node             latency_node;         /*   144    24 */
> >>         long int                   latency_offset;       /*   168     8 */
> >>
> >>         /* XXX 80 bytes hole, try to pack */
> >>
> >>         /* --- cacheline 2 boundary (256 bytes) --- */
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> >> index a2b52cf5e1bb..1e93aaaeead2 100644
> >> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> >> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> >> @@ -548,7 +548,6 @@ struct sched_entity {
> >>         /* For load-balancing: */
> >>         struct load_weight              load;
> >>         struct rb_node                  run_node;
> >> -       struct rb_node                  latency_node;
> >>         struct list_head                group_node;
> >>         unsigned int                    on_rq;
> >>
> >> @@ -569,6 +568,7 @@ struct sched_entity {
> >>         /* cached value of my_q->h_nr_running */
> >>         unsigned long                   runnable_weight;
> >>  #endif
> >> +       struct rb_node                  latency_node;
> >>         /* preemption offset in ns */
> >>         long                            latency_offset;
> >>
> >>
> >> Ran the schbench and hackbench with this patch series. Here comparison is
> >> between 6.2 stable tree, 6.2 + Patch and 6.2 + patch + above re-arrange of
> >> latency_node. Ran two cgroups, in one cgroup running stress-ng at 50%(group1)
> >> and other is running these benchmarks (group2). Set the latency nice
> >> of group2 to -20. These are run on Power system with 12 cores with SMT=8.
> >> Total of 96 CPU.
> >>
> >> schbench gets lower latency compared to stabletree. Whereas hackbench seems
> >> to regress under this case. Maybe i am doing something wrong. I will re-run
> >> and attach the numbers to series.
> >> Please suggest if any variation in the test i need to try.
> > hackbench takes advanatge of a latency nice 19 as it mainly wants to
> > run longer slice to move forward rather than preempting others all the
> > time
>
> hackbench still seems to regress in different latency nice values compared to
> baseline of 6.2 in this case. up to 50% in some cases.
>
> 12 core powerpc system  with SMT=8 i.e 96 CPU
> running 2 CPU cgroups. No quota assigned.
> 1st cgroup is running stress-ng with 48 threads. Consuming 50% of CPU.
> latency is not changed for this cgroup.
> 2nd cgroup is running hackbench. This cgroup is assigned the different latency
> nice values of 0, -20 and 19.

According to your other emails, you are using the cgroup interface and
not the task's one. Do I get it right ?

I haven't run test such tests in a cgroup but at least the test with
latency_nice == 0 should not make any noticeable difference. Does this
include the re-arrange patch that you have proposed previously ?

Also, the tests that you did on v6, gave better result.
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/34112324-de67-55eb-92bc-181a98c4311c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/

Are you running same tests or you changed something in the mean time ?

>
> Numbers are average of 10 runs in each case. Time is in seconds
>
> type       groups |   v6.2     |  v6.2 + V12   | v6.2 + V12  | v6.2 + V12
>                   |            | lat nice=0    | lat nice=-20| lat nice=+19
>                   |            |               |             |
> Process       10  |   0.36     |     0.41      |    0.43     |    0.42
> Process       20  |   0.62     |     0.76      |    0.75     |    0.75
> Process       30  |   0.87     |     1.05      |    1.04     |    1.06
> Process       40  |   1.13     |     1.34      |    1.33     |    1.33
> Process       50  |   1.38     |     1.62      |    1.66     |    1.63
> Process       60  |   1.64     |     1.91      |    1.97     |    1.90
> thread        10  |   0.35     |     0.41      |    0.44     |    0.42
> thread        20  |   0.64     |     0.78      |    0.77     |    0.79
> Process(Pipe) 10  |   0.20     |     0.34      |    0.33     |    0.34
> Process(Pipe) 20  |   0.32     |     0.52      |    0.53     |    0.52
> Process(Pipe) 30  |   0.44     |     0.70      |    0.70     |    0.69
> Process(Pipe) 40  |   0.56     |     0.88      |    0.89     |    0.88
> Process(Pipe) 50  |   0.70     |     1.08      |    1.08     |    1.07
> Process(Pipe) 60  |   0.83     |     1.27      |    1.27     |    1.26
> thread(Pipe)  10  |   0.21     |     0.35      |    0.34     |    0.36
> thread(Pipe)  10  |   0.35     |     0.55      |    0.58     |    0.55
>
>
>
> >> Re-arrange seems to help the patch series by avoiding an cacheline miss.
> >>
> >> =========================
> >> schbench
> >> =========================
> >>                  6.2   |  6.2 + V12     |     6.2 + V12 + re-arrange
> >> 1 Thread
> >>   50.0th:        9.00  |    9.00        |        9.50
> >>   75.0th:       10.50  |   10.00        |        9.50
> >>   90.0th:       11.00  |   11.00        |       10.50
> >>   95.0th:       11.00  |   11.00        |       11.00
> >>   99.0th:       11.50  |   11.50        |       11.50
> >>   99.5th:       12.50  |   12.00        |       12.00
> >>   99.9th:       14.50  |   13.50        |       12.00
> >> 2 Threads
> >>   50.0th:        9.50  |    9.50        |        8.50
> >>   75.0th:       11.00  |   10.50        |        9.50
> >>   90.0th:       13.50  |   11.50        |       10.50
> >>   95.0th:       14.00  |   12.00        |       11.00
> >>   99.0th:       15.50  |   13.50        |       12.00
> >>   99.5th:       16.00  |   14.00        |       12.00
> >>   99.9th:       17.00  |   16.00        |       16.50
> >> 4 Threads
> >>   50.0th:       11.50  |   11.50        |       10.50
> >>   75.0th:       13.50  |   12.50        |       12.50
> >>   90.0th:       15.50  |   14.50        |       14.00
> >>   95.0th:       16.50  |   15.50        |       14.50
> >>   99.0th:       20.00  |   17.50        |       16.50
> >>   99.5th:       20.50  |   18.50        |       17.00
> >>   99.9th:       22.50  |   21.00        |       19.00
> >> 8 Threads
> >>   50.0th:       14.00  |   14.00        |       14.00
> >>   75.0th:       16.00  |   16.00        |       16.00
> >>   90.0th:       18.00  |   18.00        |       17.50
> >>   95.0th:       18.50  |   18.50        |       18.50
> >>   99.0th:       20.00  |   20.00        |       20.00
> >>   99.5th:       20.50  |   21.50        |       21.00
> >>   99.9th:       22.50  |   23.50        |       23.00
> >> 16 Threads
> >>   50.0th:       19.00  |   18.50        |       19.00
> >>   75.0th:       23.00  |   22.50        |       23.00
> >>   90.0th:       25.00  |   25.50        |       25.00
> >>   95.0th:       26.50  |   26.50        |       26.00
> >>   99.0th:       28.50  |   29.00        |       28.50
> >>   99.5th:       31.00  |   30.00        |       30.00
> >>   99.9th:     5626.00  | 4761.50        |       32.50
> >> 32 Threads
> >>   50.0th:       27.00  |   27.50        |       29.00
> >>   75.0th:       35.50  |   36.50        |       38.50
> >>   90.0th:       42.00  |   44.00        |       50.50
> >>   95.0th:      447.50  | 2959.00        |     8544.00
> >>   99.0th:     7372.00  | 17032.00       |    19136.00
> >>   99.5th:    15360.00  | 19808.00       |    20704.00
> >>   99.9th:    20640.00  | 30048.00       |    30048.00
> >>
> >> ====================
> >> hackbench
> >> ====================
> >>                         6.2     |  6.2 + V12        |     6.2+ V12 +re-arrange
> >>
> >> Process 10 Time:        0.35    |       0.42        |           0.41
> >> Process 20 Time:        0.61    |       0.76        |           0.76
> >> Process 30 Time:        0.87    |       1.06        |           1.05
> >> thread 10 Time:         0.35    |       0.43        |           0.42
> >> thread 20 Time:         0.66    |       0.79        |           0.78
> >> Process(Pipe) 10 Time:  0.21    |       0.33        |           0.32
> >> Process(Pipe) 20 Time:  0.34    |       0.52        |           0.52
> >> Process(Pipe) 30 Time:  0.46    |       0.72        |           0.71
> >> thread(Pipe) 10 Time:   0.21    |       0.34        |           0.34
> >> thread(Pipe) 20 Time:   0.36    |       0.56        |           0.56
> >>
> >>
> >>>       struct list_head                group_node;
> >>>       unsigned int                    on_rq;
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> >>> index 093cc1af73dc..752fd364216c 100644
> >>> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> >>> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> >>> @@ -4434,6 +4434,7 @@ static void __sched_fork(unsigned long clone_flags, struct task_struct *p)
> >>>       p->se.nr_migrations             = 0;
> >>>       p->se.vruntime                  = 0;
> >>>       INIT_LIST_HEAD(&p->se.group_node);
> >>> +     RB_CLEAR_NODE(&p->se.latency_node);
> >>>
> >>>  #ifdef CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED
> >>>       p->se.cfs_rq                    = NULL;
> >>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> >>> index 125a6ff53378..e2aeb4511686 100644
> >>> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> >>> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> >>> @@ -680,7 +680,85 @@ struct sched_entity *__pick_last_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
> >>>
> >>>       return __node_2_se(last);
> >>>  }
> >>> +#endif
> >>>
> >>> +/**************************************************************
> >>> + * Scheduling class tree data structure manipulation methods:
> >>> + * for latency
> >>> + */
> >>> +
> >>> +static inline bool latency_before(struct sched_entity *a,
> >>> +                             struct sched_entity *b)
> >>> +{
> >>> +     return (s64)(a->vruntime + a->latency_offset - b->vruntime - b->latency_offset) < 0;
> >>> +}
> >>> +
> >>> +#define __latency_node_2_se(node) \
> >>> +     rb_entry((node), struct sched_entity, latency_node)
> >>> +
> >>> +static inline bool __latency_less(struct rb_node *a, const struct rb_node *b)
> >>> +{
> >>> +     return latency_before(__latency_node_2_se(a), __latency_node_2_se(b));
> >>> +}
> >>> +
> >>> +/*
> >>> + * Enqueue an entity into the latency rb-tree:
> >>> + */
> >>> +static void __enqueue_latency(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se, int flags)
> >>> +{
> >>> +
> >>> +     /* Only latency sensitive entity can be added to the list */
> >>> +     if (se->latency_offset >= 0)
> >>> +             return;
> >>> +
> >>> +     if (!RB_EMPTY_NODE(&se->latency_node))
> >>> +             return;
> >>> +
> >>> +     /*
> >>> +      * The entity is always added the latency list at wakeup.
> >>> +      * Then, a not waking up entity that is put back in the list after an
> >>> +      * execution time less than sysctl_sched_min_granularity, means that
> >>> +      * the entity has been preempted by a higher sched class or an entity
> >>> +      * with higher latency constraint. In thi case, the entity is also put
> >>> +      * back in the latency list so it gets a chance to run 1st during the
> >>> +      * next slice.
> >>> +      */
> >>> +     if (!(flags & ENQUEUE_WAKEUP)) {
> >>> +             u64 delta_exec = se->sum_exec_runtime - se->prev_sum_exec_runtime;
> >>> +
> >>> +             if (delta_exec >= sysctl_sched_min_granularity)
> >>> +                     return;
> >>> +     }
> >>> +
> >>> +     rb_add_cached(&se->latency_node, &cfs_rq->latency_timeline, __latency_less);
> >>> +}
> >>> +
> >>> +/*
> >>> + * Dequeue an entity from the latency rb-tree and return true if it was really
> >>> + * part of the rb-tree:
> >>> + */
> >>> +static bool __dequeue_latency(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se)
> >>> +{
> >>> +     if (!RB_EMPTY_NODE(&se->latency_node)) {
> >>> +             rb_erase_cached(&se->latency_node, &cfs_rq->latency_timeline);
> >>> +             RB_CLEAR_NODE(&se->latency_node);
> >>> +             return true;
> >>> +     }
> >>> +
> >>> +     return false;
> >>> +}
> >>> +
> >>> +static struct sched_entity *__pick_first_latency(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
> >>> +{
> >>> +     struct rb_node *left = rb_first_cached(&cfs_rq->latency_timeline);
> >>> +
> >>> +     if (!left)
> >>> +             return NULL;
> >>> +
> >>> +     return __latency_node_2_se(left);
> >>> +}
> >>> +
> >>> +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG
> >>>  /**************************************************************
> >>>   * Scheduling class statistics methods:
> >>>   */
> >>> @@ -4758,8 +4836,10 @@ enqueue_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se, int flags)
> >>>       check_schedstat_required();
> >>>       update_stats_enqueue_fair(cfs_rq, se, flags);
> >>>       check_spread(cfs_rq, se);
> >>> -     if (!curr)
> >>> +     if (!curr) {
> >>>               __enqueue_entity(cfs_rq, se);
> >>> +             __enqueue_latency(cfs_rq, se, flags);
> >>> +     }
> >>>       se->on_rq = 1;
> >>>
> >>>       if (cfs_rq->nr_running == 1) {
> >>> @@ -4845,8 +4925,10 @@ dequeue_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se, int flags)
> >>>
> >>>       clear_buddies(cfs_rq, se);
> >>>
> >>> -     if (se != cfs_rq->curr)
> >>> +     if (se != cfs_rq->curr) {
> >>>               __dequeue_entity(cfs_rq, se);
> >>> +             __dequeue_latency(cfs_rq, se);
> >>> +     }
> >>>       se->on_rq = 0;
> >>>       account_entity_dequeue(cfs_rq, se);
> >>>
> >>> @@ -4941,6 +5023,7 @@ set_next_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se)
> >>>                */
> >>>               update_stats_wait_end_fair(cfs_rq, se);
> >>>               __dequeue_entity(cfs_rq, se);
> >>> +             __dequeue_latency(cfs_rq, se);
> >>>               update_load_avg(cfs_rq, se, UPDATE_TG);
> >>>       }
> >>>
> >>> @@ -4979,7 +5062,7 @@ static struct sched_entity *
> >>>  pick_next_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *curr)
> >>>  {
> >>>       struct sched_entity *left = __pick_first_entity(cfs_rq);
> >>> -     struct sched_entity *se;
> >>> +     struct sched_entity *latency, *se;
> >>>
> >>>       /*
> >>>        * If curr is set we have to see if its left of the leftmost entity
> >>> @@ -5021,6 +5104,12 @@ pick_next_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *curr)
> >>>               se = cfs_rq->last;
> >>>       }
> >>>
> >>> +     /* Check for latency sensitive entity waiting for running */
> >>> +     latency = __pick_first_latency(cfs_rq);
> >>> +     if (latency && (latency != se) &&
> >>> +         wakeup_preempt_entity(latency, se) < 1)
> >>> +             se = latency;
> >>> +
> >>>       return se;
> >>>  }
> >>>
> >>> @@ -5044,6 +5133,7 @@ static void put_prev_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *prev)
> >>>               update_stats_wait_start_fair(cfs_rq, prev);
> >>>               /* Put 'current' back into the tree. */
> >>>               __enqueue_entity(cfs_rq, prev);
> >>> +             __enqueue_latency(cfs_rq, prev, 0);
> >>>               /* in !on_rq case, update occurred at dequeue */
> >>>               update_load_avg(cfs_rq, prev, 0);
> >>>       }
> >>> @@ -12222,6 +12312,7 @@ static void set_next_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, bool first)
> >>>  void init_cfs_rq(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
> >>>  {
> >>>       cfs_rq->tasks_timeline = RB_ROOT_CACHED;
> >>> +     cfs_rq->latency_timeline = RB_ROOT_CACHED;
> >>>       u64_u32_store(cfs_rq->min_vruntime, (u64)(-(1LL << 20)));
> >>>  #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> >>>       raw_spin_lock_init(&cfs_rq->removed.lock);
> >>> @@ -12378,6 +12469,7 @@ void init_tg_cfs_entry(struct task_group *tg, struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq,
> >>>       se->my_q = cfs_rq;
> >>>
> >>>       se->latency_offset = calc_latency_offset(tg->latency_prio);
> >>> +     RB_CLEAR_NODE(&se->latency_node);
> >>>
> >>>       /* guarantee group entities always have weight */
> >>>       update_load_set(&se->load, NICE_0_LOAD);
> >>> @@ -12529,8 +12621,19 @@ int sched_group_set_latency(struct task_group *tg, int prio)
> >>>
> >>>       for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
> >>>               struct sched_entity *se = tg->se[i];
> >>> +             struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(i);
> >>> +             struct rq_flags rf;
> >>> +             bool queued;
> >>> +
> >>> +             rq_lock_irqsave(rq, &rf);
> >>>
> >>> +             queued = __dequeue_latency(se->cfs_rq, se);
> >>>               WRITE_ONCE(se->latency_offset, latency_offset);
> >>> +             if (queued)
> >>> +                     __enqueue_latency(se->cfs_rq, se, ENQUEUE_WAKEUP);
> >>> +
> >>> +
> >>> +             rq_unlock_irqrestore(rq, &rf);
> >>>       }
> >>>
> >>>       mutex_unlock(&shares_mutex);
> >>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/sched.h b/kernel/sched/sched.h
> >>> index 9a2e71231083..21dd309e98a9 100644
> >>> --- a/kernel/sched/sched.h
> >>> +++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h
> >>> @@ -570,6 +570,7 @@ struct cfs_rq {
> >>>  #endif
> >>>
> >>>       struct rb_root_cached   tasks_timeline;
> >>> +     struct rb_root_cached   latency_timeline;
> >>>
> >>>       /*
> >>>        * 'curr' points to currently running entity on this cfs_rq.
>



[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux