diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | kernel/sched/core.c | 68 |
1 files changed, 61 insertions, 7 deletions
diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c index 96a4267e6020..9fd37169b302 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/core.c +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c @@ -2089,11 +2089,24 @@ try_to_wake_up(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int state, int wake_flags) p->sched_contributes_to_load = !!task_contributes_to_load(p); p->state = TASK_WAKING; + if (p->in_iowait) { + delayacct_blkio_end(); + atomic_dec(&task_rq(p)->nr_iowait); + } + cpu = select_task_rq(p, p->wake_cpu, SD_BALANCE_WAKE, wake_flags); if (task_cpu(p) != cpu) { wake_flags |= WF_MIGRATED; set_task_cpu(p, cpu); } + +#else /* CONFIG_SMP */ + + if (p->in_iowait) { + delayacct_blkio_end(); + atomic_dec(&task_rq(p)->nr_iowait); + } + #endif /* CONFIG_SMP */ ttwu_queue(p, cpu, wake_flags); @@ -2143,8 +2156,13 @@ static void try_to_wake_up_local(struct task_struct *p, struct rq_flags *rf) trace_sched_waking(p); - if (!task_on_rq_queued(p)) + if (!task_on_rq_queued(p)) { + if (p->in_iowait) { + delayacct_blkio_end(); + atomic_dec(&rq->nr_iowait); + } ttwu_activate(rq, p, ENQUEUE_WAKEUP); + } ttwu_do_wakeup(rq, p, 0, rf); ttwu_stat(p, smp_processor_id(), 0); @@ -2956,6 +2974,36 @@ unsigned long long nr_context_switches(void) return sum; } +/* + * IO-wait accounting, and how its mostly bollocks (on SMP). + * + * The idea behind IO-wait account is to account the idle time that we could + * have spend running if it were not for IO. That is, if we were to improve the + * storage performance, we'd have a proportional reduction in IO-wait time. + * + * This all works nicely on UP, where, when a task blocks on IO, we account + * idle time as IO-wait, because if the storage were faster, it could've been + * running and we'd not be idle. + * + * This has been extended to SMP, by doing the same for each CPU. This however + * is broken. + * + * Imagine for instance the case where two tasks block on one CPU, only the one + * CPU will have IO-wait accounted, while the other has regular idle. Even + * though, if the storage were faster, both could've ran at the same time, + * utilising both CPUs. + * + * This means, that when looking globally, the current IO-wait accounting on + * SMP is a lower bound, by reason of under accounting. + * + * Worse, since the numbers are provided per CPU, they are sometimes + * interpreted per CPU, and that is nonsensical. A blocked task isn't strictly + * associated with any one particular CPU, it can wake to another CPU than it + * blocked on. This means the per CPU IO-wait number is meaningless. + * + * Task CPU affinities can make all that even more 'interesting'. + */ + unsigned long nr_iowait(void) { unsigned long i, sum = 0; @@ -2966,6 +3014,13 @@ unsigned long nr_iowait(void) return sum; } +/* + * Consumers of these two interfaces, like for example the cpufreq menu + * governor are using nonsensical data. Boosting frequency for a CPU that has + * IO-wait which might not even end up running the task when it does become + * runnable. + */ + unsigned long nr_iowait_cpu(int cpu) { struct rq *this = cpu_rq(cpu); @@ -3377,6 +3432,11 @@ static void __sched notrace __schedule(bool preempt) deactivate_task(rq, prev, DEQUEUE_SLEEP); prev->on_rq = 0; + if (prev->in_iowait) { + atomic_inc(&rq->nr_iowait); + delayacct_blkio_start(); + } + /* * If a worker went to sleep, notify and ask workqueue * whether it wants to wake up a task to maintain @@ -5075,19 +5135,13 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(yield_to); long __sched io_schedule_timeout(long timeout) { int old_iowait = current->in_iowait; - struct rq *rq; long ret; current->in_iowait = 1; blk_schedule_flush_plug(current); - delayacct_blkio_start(); - rq = raw_rq(); - atomic_inc(&rq->nr_iowait); ret = schedule_timeout(timeout); current->in_iowait = old_iowait; - atomic_dec(&rq->nr_iowait); - delayacct_blkio_end(); return ret; } |