On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 02:37:05PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> Anyway, Oleg, do you see anything blatantly buggered with this patch?
> 
> (the stats were already dodgy for rq-stats, this patch makes them dodgy
> for task-stats too)

It now also has concurrency on wakeup; but afaict that's harmless, we'll
get racing stores of p->state = TASK_RUNNING, much the same as if there
was a remote wakeup vs a wait-loop terminating early.

I suppose the tracepoint consumers might have to deal with some
artifacts there, but that's their problem.

> ---
>  kernel/sched/core.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index 102dfcf0a29a..474aa4c8e9d2 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -1990,6 +1990,28 @@ try_to_wake_up(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int 
> state, int wake_flags)
>       unsigned long flags;
>       int cpu, success = 0;
>  
> +     if (p == current) {
> +             /*
> +              * We're waking current, this means 'p->on_rq' and 'task_cpu(p)
> +              * == smp_processor_id()'. Together this means we can special
> +              * case the whole 'p->on_rq && ttwu_remote()' case below
> +              * without taking any locks.
> +              *
> +              * In particular:
> +              *  - we rely on Program-Order guarantees for all the ordering,
> +              *  - we're serialized against set_special_state() by virtue of
> +              *    it disabling IRQs (this allows not taking ->pi_lock).
> +              */
> +             if (!(p->state & state))
> +                     goto out;
> +
> +             success = 1;
> +             trace_sched_waking(p);
> +             p->state = TASK_RUNNING;
> +             trace_sched_woken(p);
> +             goto out;
> +     }
> +
>       /*
>        * If we are going to wake up a thread waiting for CONDITION we
>        * need to ensure that CONDITION=1 done by the caller can not be
> @@ -1999,7 +2021,7 @@ try_to_wake_up(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int 
> state, int wake_flags)
>       raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&p->pi_lock, flags);
>       smp_mb__after_spinlock();
>       if (!(p->state & state))
> -             goto out;
> +             goto unlock;
>  
>       trace_sched_waking(p);
>  
> @@ -2029,7 +2051,7 @@ try_to_wake_up(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int 
> state, int wake_flags)
>        */
>       smp_rmb();
>       if (p->on_rq && ttwu_remote(p, wake_flags))
> -             goto stat;
> +             goto unlock;
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
>       /*
> @@ -2089,12 +2111,16 @@ try_to_wake_up(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int 
> state, int wake_flags)
>  #endif /* CONFIG_SMP */
>  
>       ttwu_queue(p, cpu, wake_flags);
> -stat:
> -     ttwu_stat(p, cpu, wake_flags);
> -out:
> +unlock:
>       raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&p->pi_lock, flags);
>  
> -     return success;
> +out:
> +     if (success) {
> +             ttwu_stat(p, cpu, wake_flags);
> +             return true;
> +     }
> +
> +     return false;
>  }
>  
>  /**

Reply via email to