mirror of
https://mirrors.bfsu.edu.cn/git/linux.git
synced 2024-11-28 06:34:12 +08:00
sched/rt: Fix rq->clock_update_flags < RQCF_ACT_SKIP warning
While running rt-tests' pi_stress program I got the following splat: rq->clock_update_flags < RQCF_ACT_SKIP WARNING: CPU: 27 PID: 0 at kernel/sched/sched.h:960 assert_clock_updated.isra.38.part.39+0x13/0x20 [...] <IRQ> enqueue_top_rt_rq+0xf4/0x150 ? cpufreq_dbs_governor_start+0x170/0x170 sched_rt_rq_enqueue+0x65/0x80 sched_rt_period_timer+0x156/0x360 ? sched_rt_rq_enqueue+0x80/0x80 __hrtimer_run_queues+0xfa/0x260 hrtimer_interrupt+0xcb/0x220 smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x62/0x120 apic_timer_interrupt+0xf/0x20 </IRQ> [...] do_idle+0x183/0x1e0 cpu_startup_entry+0x5f/0x70 start_secondary+0x192/0x1d0 secondary_startup_64+0xa5/0xb0 We can get rid of it be the "traditional" means of adding an update_rq_clock() call after acquiring the rq->lock in do_sched_rt_period_timer(). The case for the RT task throttling (which this workload also hits) can be ignored in that the skip_update call is actually bogus and quite the contrary (the request bits are removed/reverted). By setting RQCF_UPDATED we really don't care if the skip is happening or not and will therefore make the assert_clock_updated() check happy. Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de> Reviewed-by: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: dave@stgolabs.net Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180402164954.16255-1-dave@stgolabs.net Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
ea2a6af517
commit
d29a20645d
@ -839,6 +839,8 @@ static int do_sched_rt_period_timer(struct rt_bandwidth *rt_b, int overrun)
|
||||
continue;
|
||||
|
||||
raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock);
|
||||
update_rq_clock(rq);
|
||||
|
||||
if (rt_rq->rt_time) {
|
||||
u64 runtime;
|
||||
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user