The commit
5378097a078d ("sched/core: Offload wakee task activation if it
the wakee is descheduling") checked rq->nr_running <= 1 to avoid task
stacking when WF_ON_CPU.
Per the ordering of writes to p->on_rq and p->on_cpu, observing p->on_cpu
(WF_ON_CPU) in ttwu_queue_cond() implies !p->on_rq, IOW p has gone through
the deactivate_task() in __schedule(), thus p has been accounted out of
rq->nr_running. As such, the task being the only runnable task on the rq
implies reading rq->nr_running == 0 at that point.
The benchmark result is in [1].
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/
e34de686-4e85-bde1-9f3c-
9bbc86b38627@linux.alibaba.com/
Suggested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tianchen Ding <dtcccc@linux.alibaba.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220608233412.327341-2-dtcccc@linux.alibaba.com
* CPU then use the wakelist to offload the task activation to
* the soon-to-be-idle CPU as the current CPU is likely busy.
* nr_running is checked to avoid unnecessary task stacking.
+ *
+ * Note that we can only get here with (wakee) p->on_rq=0,
+ * p->on_cpu can be whatever, we've done the dequeue, so
+ * the wakee has been accounted out of ->nr_running.
*/
- if ((wake_flags & WF_ON_CPU) && cpu_rq(cpu)->nr_running <= 1)
+ if ((wake_flags & WF_ON_CPU) && !cpu_rq(cpu)->nr_running)
return true;
return false;