-
由 Peter Zijlstra 提交于
Michael spotted that the idle_balance() push down created a task priority problem. Previously, when we called idle_balance() before pick_next_task() it wasn't a problem when -- because of the rq->lock droppage -- an rt/dl task slipped in. Similarly for pre_schedule(), rt pre-schedule could have a dl task slip in. But by pulling it into the pick_next_task() loop, we'll not try a higher task priority again. Cure this by creating a re-start condition in pick_next_task(); and triggering this from pick_next_task_{rt,fair}(). It also fixes a live-lock where we get stuck in pick_next_task_fair() due to idle_balance() seeing !0 nr_running but there not actually being any fair tasks about. Reported-by: NMichael Wang <wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Fixes: 38033c37 ("sched: Push down pre_schedule() and idle_balance()") Tested-by: NSasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@gmail.com> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20140224121218.GR15586@twins.programming.kicks-ass.netSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
37e117c0