Possible fix for interactivity problems
John Baldwin
jhb at FreeBSD.org
Tue Oct 12 12:56:22 PDT 2004
The code to manage priority changes in both schedulers currently don't handle
all the edge cases and have exposed one bug in msleep() that results in the
interactive priority "boost" not taking effect until the thread is woken up.
That is, normally the boost helps the thread that goes to sleep be chosen
over other threads when picking a thread to wakeup, but that doesn't
currently happen because we bump the priority after we stick the thread on
the sleep queue and our schedulers aren't currently smart enough to resort
threads on sleep queues when their priority changes (I'm working on that).
The patch below should fix that problem for most cases by bumping the
priority before putting the thread on the sleep queue:
--- //depot/projects/smpng/sys/kern/kern_synch.c 2004/10/12 19:09:56
+++ //depot/user/jhb/needresched/kern/kern_synch.c 2004/10/12 19:26:30
@@ -189,6 +189,13 @@
}
/*
+ * Adjust this thread's priority.
+ */
+ mtx_lock_spin(&sched_lock);
+ sched_prio(td, priority & PRIMASK);
+ mtx_unlock_spin(&sched_lock);
+
+ /*
* We put ourselves on the sleep queue and start our timeout
* before calling thread_suspend_check, as we could stop there,
* and a wakeup or a SIGCONT (or both) could occur while we were
@@ -208,15 +215,6 @@
} else
sig = 0;
- /*
- * Adjust this thread's priority.
- *
- * XXX: do we need to save priority in td_base_pri?
- */
- mtx_lock_spin(&sched_lock);
- sched_prio(td, priority & PRIMASK);
- mtx_unlock_spin(&sched_lock);
-
if (timo && catch)
rval = sleepq_timedwait_sig(ident, sig != 0);
else if (timo)
Let me know if this helps.
--
John Baldwin <jhb at FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
"Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org
More information about the freebsd-current
mailing list