sched: Guarantee task priority in pick_next_task()

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: Michael Wang <wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Fixes: 38033c37faab ("sched: Push down pre_schedule() and idle_balance()")
Tested-by: Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter 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.net
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

1 files changed, 9 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/kernel/sched/rt.c b/kernel/sched/rt.c
index 4d4b386598a..398b3f99082 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/rt.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/rt.c
@@ -1360,8 +1360,16 @@ pick_next_task_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev)
 	struct task_struct *p;
 	struct rt_rq *rt_rq = &rq->rt;
 
-	if (need_pull_rt_task(rq, prev))
+	if (need_pull_rt_task(rq, prev)) {
 		pull_rt_task(rq);
+		/*
+		 * pull_rt_task() can drop (and re-acquire) rq->lock; this
+		 * means a dl task can slip in, in which case we need to
+		 * re-start task selection.
+		 */
+		if (unlikely(rq->dl.dl_nr_running))
+			return RETRY_TASK;
+	}
 
 	if (!rt_rq->rt_nr_running)
 		return NULL;