In message <Pine.LNX.4.33.0201040050440.1363-100000 _at_ localhost.localdomain> you
write:
>
> now that new-year's parties are over things are getting boring again. For
> those who want to see and perhaps even try something more complex, i'm
> announcing this patch that is a pretty radical rewrite of the Linux
> scheduler for 2.5.2-pre6:
Hi Ingo...
Reading through 2.5.2-C1, couple of comments/questions:
sched.c line 402:
/*
* Current runqueue is empty, try to find work on
* other runqueues.
*
* We call this with the current runqueue locked,
* irqs disabled.
*/
static void load_balance(runqueue_t *this_rq)
This first comment doesn't seem to be true: it also seems to be called
from idle_tick and expire task. Perhaps it'd be nicer too, to split
load_balance into "if (is_unbalanced(cpu())) pull_task(cpu())". (I
like "pull_" and "push_" nomenclature for the scheduler).
sched.c load_balance() line 435:
if ((load > max_load) && (load < prev_max_load) &&
(rq_tmp != this_rq)) {
Why are you ignoring a CPU with more than the previous maximum load
(prev_max_load is incremented earlier)?
sched.c expire_task line 552:
if (p->array != rq->active) {
p->need_resched = 1;
return;
}
I'm not clear how this can happen??
Finally, I gather you want to change smp_processor_id() to cpu()?
That's fine (smp_num_cpus => num_cpus() too please), but it'd be nice
to have that as a separate patch, rather than getting stuck with BOTH
cpu() and smp_processor_id().
Patch below (untested) corrects SMP_CACHE_BYTES alignment, minor
comment, and rebalance tick for HZ < 100 (ie. User Mode Linux).
Rusty.
PS. Awesome work.
--
Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell.
diff -urN -I \$.*\$ --exclude TAGS -X /home/rusty/devel/kernel/kernel-patches/current-dontdiff --minimal working-2.5.2-pre9-mingosched/kernel/sched.c working-2.5.2-pre9-mingoschedfix/kernel/sched.c
--- working-2.5.2-pre9-mingosched/kernel/sched.c Mon Jan 7 12:39:10 2002
+++ working-2.5.2-pre9-mingoschedfix/kernel/sched.c Mon Jan 7 13:51:39 2002
@@ -43,14 +43,14 @@
* if there is a RT task active in an SMP system but there is no
* RT scheduling activity otherwise.
*/
-static struct runqueue {
+struct runqueue {
int cpu;
spinlock_t lock;
unsigned long nr_running, nr_switches, last_rt_event;
task_t *curr, *idle;
prio_array_t *active, *expired, arrays[2];
- char __pad [SMP_CACHE_BYTES];
-} runqueues [NR_CPUS] __cacheline_aligned;
+} ____cacheline_aligned;
+static struct runqueue runqueues[NR_CPUS] __cacheline_aligned;
#define this_rq() (runqueues + cpu())
#define task_rq(p) (runqueues + (p)->cpu)
@@ -102,7 +102,7 @@
* This is the per-process load estimator. Processes that generate
* more load than the system can handle get a priority penalty.
*
- * The estimator uses a 4-entry load-history ringbuffer which is
+ * The estimator uses a SLEEP_HIST_SIZE-entry load-history ringbuffer which is
* updated whenever a task is moved to/from the runqueue. The load
* estimate is also updated from the timer tick to get an accurate
* estimation of currently executing tasks as well.
@@ -511,7 +511,7 @@
spin_unlock(&busiest->lock);
}
-#define REBALANCE_TICK (HZ/100)
+#define REBALANCE_TICK ((HZ/100) ?: 1)
void idle_tick(void)
{
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo _at_ vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/