Commit 318e0893 authored by Gregory Haskins's avatar Gregory Haskins Committed by Ingo Molnar
Browse files

sched: pre-route RT tasks on wakeup

In the original patch series that Steven Rostedt and I worked on together,
we both took different approaches to low-priority wakeup path.  I utilized
"pre-routing" (push the task away to a less important RQ before activating)
approach, while Steve utilized a "post-routing" approach.  The advantage of
my approach is that you avoid the overhead of a wasted activate/deactivate
cycle and peripherally related burdens.  The advantage of Steve's method is
that it neatly solves an issue preventing a "pull" optimization from being

In the end, we ended up deploying Steve's idea.  But it later dawned on me
that we could get the best of both worlds by deploying both ideas together,
albeit slightly modified.

The idea is simple:  Use a "light-weight" lookup for pre-routing, since we
only need to approximate a good home for the task.  And we also retain the
post-routing push logic to clean up any inaccuracies caused by a condition
of "priority mistargeting" caused by the lightweight lookup.  Most of the
time, the pre-routing should work and yield lower overhead.  In the cases
where it doesnt, the post-router will bat cleanup.
Signed-off-by: default avatarGregory Haskins <>
Signed-off-by: default avatarSteven Rostedt <>
Signed-off-by: default avatarIngo Molnar <>
parent 2de0b463
......@@ -151,8 +151,27 @@ yield_task_rt(struct rq *rq)
static int find_lowest_rq(struct task_struct *task);
static int select_task_rq_rt(struct task_struct *p, int sync)
struct rq *rq = task_rq(p);
* If the task will not preempt the RQ, try to find a better RQ
* before we even activate the task
if ((p->prio >= rq->rt.highest_prio)
&& (p->nr_cpus_allowed > 1)) {
int cpu = find_lowest_rq(p);
return (cpu == -1) ? task_cpu(p) : cpu;
* Otherwise, just let it ride on the affined RQ and the
* post-schedule router will push the preempted task away
return task_cpu(p);
#endif /* CONFIG_SMP */
Markdown is supported
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment