From c249f255aab86b9b187ba319b9d2684841ac7c8d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Dave Kleikamp Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 14:14:13 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] sched/rt: Minimize rq->lock contention in do_sched_rt_period_timer() With CONFIG_RT_GROUP_SCHED=y, do_sched_rt_period_timer() sequentially takes each CPU's rq->lock. On a large, busy system, the cumulative time it takes to acquire each lock can be excessive, even triggering a watchdog timeout. If rt_rq->rt_time and rt_rq->rt_nr_running are both zero, this function does nothing while holding the lock, so don't bother taking it at all. Signed-off-by: Dave Kleikamp Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Cc: Linus Torvalds Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Thomas Gleixner Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/a767637b-df85-912f-ba69-c90ee00a3fb6@oracle.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar --- kernel/sched/rt.c | 11 +++++++++++ 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) diff --git a/kernel/sched/rt.c b/kernel/sched/rt.c index c18b50094fab..581d5c7a5264 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/rt.c +++ b/kernel/sched/rt.c @@ -840,6 +840,17 @@ static int do_sched_rt_period_timer(struct rt_bandwidth *rt_b, int overrun) int enqueue = 0; struct rt_rq *rt_rq = sched_rt_period_rt_rq(rt_b, i); struct rq *rq = rq_of_rt_rq(rt_rq); + int skip; + + /* + * When span == cpu_online_mask, taking each rq->lock + * can be time-consuming. Try to avoid it when possible. + */ + raw_spin_lock(&rt_rq->rt_runtime_lock); + skip = !rt_rq->rt_time && !rt_rq->rt_nr_running; + raw_spin_unlock(&rt_rq->rt_runtime_lock); + if (skip) + continue; raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock); if (rt_rq->rt_time) { -- 2.20.1