From: Peter Zijlstra Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2024 22:25:49 +0000 (+0200) Subject: sched: Use set_next_task(.first) where required X-Git-Tag: v6.12-rc1~120^2~18 X-Git-Url: http://git.ipfire.org/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=7d2180d9d943d31491d77e336557f33670cfe7fd;p=thirdparty%2Fkernel%2Flinux.git sched: Use set_next_task(.first) where required Turns out the core_sched bits forgot to use the set_next_task(.first=true) variant. Notably: pick_next_task() := pick_task() + set_next_task(.first = true) Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240813224015.614146342@infradead.org --- diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c index 016581168cb8f..406b794f84237 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/core.c +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c @@ -6010,7 +6010,7 @@ pick_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, struct rq_flags *rf) next = rq->core_pick; if (next != prev) { put_prev_task(rq, prev); - set_next_task(rq, next); + set_next_task_first(rq, next); } rq->core_pick = NULL; @@ -6184,7 +6184,7 @@ pick_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, struct rq_flags *rf) } out_set_next: - set_next_task(rq, next); + set_next_task_first(rq, next); out: if (rq->core->core_forceidle_count && next == rq->idle) queue_core_balance(rq); diff --git a/kernel/sched/sched.h b/kernel/sched/sched.h index 2f5d658c0631f..d33311d6a7384 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/sched.h +++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h @@ -2363,6 +2363,10 @@ static inline void set_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *next) next->sched_class->set_next_task(rq, next, false); } +static inline void set_next_task_first(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *next) +{ + next->sched_class->set_next_task(rq, next, true); +} /* * Helper to define a sched_class instance; each one is placed in a separate