Le lundi 25 mai 2020 à 16:42:49 (+0200), gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx a écrit :
>
> The patch below does not apply to the 5.4-stable tree.
> If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
> tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
> id to <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>.
This patch needs commit
b34cb07dde7c ("sched/fair: Fix enqueue_task_fair() warning some more")
to be applied first. But then, it will not apply. The backport is :
[ Upstream commit 39f23ce07b9355d05a64ae303ce20d1c4b92b957 upstream ]
Although not exactly identical, unthrottle_cfs_rq() and enqueue_task_fair()
are quite close and follow the same sequence for enqueuing an entity in the
cfs hierarchy. Modify unthrottle_cfs_rq() to use the same pattern as
enqueue_task_fair(). This fixes a problem already faced with the latter and
add an optimization in the last for_each_sched_entity loop.
Fixes: fe61468b2cb (sched/fair: Fix enqueue_task_fair warning)
Reported-by Tao Zhou <zohooouoto@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Phil Auld <pauld@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Ben Segall <bsegall@xxxxxxxxxx>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200513135528.4742-1-vincent.guittot@xxxxxxxxxx
---
kernel/sched/fair.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 193b6ab74d7f..36e3bb990845 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -4560,7 +4560,6 @@ void unthrottle_cfs_rq(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
struct rq *rq = rq_of(cfs_rq);
struct cfs_bandwidth *cfs_b = tg_cfs_bandwidth(cfs_rq->tg);
struct sched_entity *se;
- int enqueue = 1;
long task_delta, idle_task_delta;
se = cfs_rq->tg->se[cpu_of(rq)];
@@ -4584,21 +4583,41 @@ void unthrottle_cfs_rq(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
idle_task_delta = cfs_rq->idle_h_nr_running;
for_each_sched_entity(se) {
if (se->on_rq)
- enqueue = 0;
+ break;
+ cfs_rq = cfs_rq_of(se);
+ enqueue_entity(cfs_rq, se, ENQUEUE_WAKEUP);
+
+ cfs_rq->h_nr_running += task_delta;
+ cfs_rq->idle_h_nr_running += idle_task_delta;
+ /* end evaluation on encountering a throttled cfs_rq */
+ if (cfs_rq_throttled(cfs_rq))
+ goto unthrottle_throttle;
+ }
+
+ for_each_sched_entity(se) {
cfs_rq = cfs_rq_of(se);
- if (enqueue)
- enqueue_entity(cfs_rq, se, ENQUEUE_WAKEUP);
+
cfs_rq->h_nr_running += task_delta;
cfs_rq->idle_h_nr_running += idle_task_delta;
+
+ /* end evaluation on encountering a throttled cfs_rq */
if (cfs_rq_throttled(cfs_rq))
- break;
+ goto unthrottle_throttle;
+
+ /*
+ * One parent has been throttled and cfs_rq removed from the
+ * list. Add it back to not break the leaf list.
+ */
+ if (throttled_hierarchy(cfs_rq))
+ list_add_leaf_cfs_rq(cfs_rq);
}
- if (!se)
- add_nr_running(rq, task_delta);
+ /* At this point se is NULL and we are at root level*/
+ add_nr_running(rq, task_delta);
+unthrottle_throttle:
/*
* The cfs_rq_throttled() breaks in the above iteration can result in
* incomplete leaf list maintenance, resulting in triggering the
@@ -4607,7 +4626,8 @@ void unthrottle_cfs_rq(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
for_each_sched_entity(se) {
cfs_rq = cfs_rq_of(se);
- list_add_leaf_cfs_rq(cfs_rq);
+ if (list_add_leaf_cfs_rq(cfs_rq))
+ break;
}
assert_list_leaf_cfs_rq(rq);
--
2.17.1
