Hmm... still don't see it. update_process_times() surely doesn't
re-enter? And another CPU cannot load_balance() p (== current) away
from us.
Another question:
if (likely(prev != next)) {
rq->nr_switches++;
rq->curr = next;
next->cpu = prev->cpu;
context_switch(prev, next);
/*
* The runqueue pointer might be from another CPU
* if the new task was last running on a different
* CPU - thus re-load it.
*/
barrier();
rq = this_rq();
}
spin_unlock_irq(&rq->lock);
I do not understand this comment. How can rq (ie. smp_processor_id())
change? Nothing sleeps here, and if it DID change, the
spin_unlock_irq() would be wrong...
> i've taken your fixes, please double-check the next patch whether all of
> them are correctly applied.
Um, missed one:
static struct runqueue {
- int cpu;
spinlock_t lock;
- unsigned long nr_running, nr_switches, last_rt_event;
+ unsigned long nr_running, nr_switches;
task_t *curr, *idle;
prio_array_t *active, *expired, arrays[2];
- char __pad [SMP_CACHE_BYTES];
+ int prev_nr_running[NR_CPUS];
} runqueues [NR_CPUS] __cacheline_aligned;
You want each entry in the array to be aligned, not the whole array!
You need to define the struct runqueue to be the cacheline aligned
(using ____cacheline_aligned since it's a type), THEN put the
__cacheline_aligned after the array declaration so it gets put in the
aligned section:
struct runqueue {
spinlock_t lock;
unsigned long nr_running, nr_switches;
task_t *curr, *idle;
prio_array_t *active, *expired, arrays[2];
int prev_nr_running[NR_CPUS];
} ____cacheline_aligned;
static struct runqueue runqueues [NR_CPUS] __cacheline_aligned;
This is why my __per_cpu patch was invented 8)
Cheers,
Rusty.
-- Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/