Re: [PATCH v5 3/5] sched/fair: Skip core update if task pending

[Abel Wu]

On 9/9/22 6:09 PM, Chen Yu wrote:
> On 2022-09-09 at 13:53:02 +0800, Abel Wu wrote:
> > The function __update_idle_core() considers this cpu is idle so
> > only checks its siblings to decide whether the resident core is
> > idle or not and update has_idle_cores hint if necessary. But the
> > problem is that this cpu might not be idle at that moment any
> > more, resulting in the hint being misleading.
> >
> > It's not proper to make this check everywhere in the idle path,
> > but checking just before core updating can make the has_idle_core
> > hint more reliable with negligible cost.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   kernel/sched/fair.c | 3 +++
> >   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > index 7abe188a1533..fad289530e07 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > @@ -6294,6 +6294,9 @@ void __update_idle_core(struct rq *rq)
> >   	int core = cpu_of(rq);
> >   	int cpu;
> >   
> > +	if (rq->ttwu_pending)
> > +		return;
> > +
> Is it to deal with the race condition? I'm thinking of the
> following scenario: task p1 on rq1 is about to switch to idle.
> However when p1 reaches __update_idle_core(), someone on other
> CPU tries to wake up p2, and leverages rq1 to queue p2
> thus set the ttwu_pending flag on rq1. It is likely that
> rq1 becomes idle but soon finds that TF_NEED_RESCHED is set, thus
> quits the idle loop. As a result rq will not be idle and we will
> get false positive here.

Yes, exactly as you said.