Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 11:26:59 +0100
From: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>
To: luca abeni <luca.abeni@santannapisa.it>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Claudio Scordino <claudio@evidence.eu.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Tommaso Cucinotta <tommaso.cucinotta@sssup.it>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
        Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/deadline: fix switching to -deadline
Message-ID: <20170421102659.GS23862@e106622-lin>
References: <1492716656-5362-1-git-send-email-luca.abeni@santannapisa.it>
 <20170421093926.GQ23862@e106622-lin>
 <20170421114240.0ef43522@nowhere>
 <20170421094729.GR23862@e106622-lin>
 <20170421115907.4044665a@nowhere>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170421115907.4044665a@nowhere>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1212
Lines: 31

On 21/04/17 11:59, Luca Abeni wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 10:47:29 +0100
> Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com> wrote:
> [...]
> > > > > *dl_se, update_dl_entity(dl_se, pi_se);
> > > > >  	else if (flags & ENQUEUE_REPLENISH)
> > > > >  		replenish_dl_entity(dl_se, pi_se);
> > > > > +	else if ((flags & ENQUEUE_RESTORE) &&    
> > > > 
> > > > Not sure I understand how this works. AFAICT we are doing
> > > > __sched_setscheduler() when we want to catch the case of a new
> > > > dl_entity (SCHED_{OTHER,FIFO} -> SCHED_DEADLINE}, but queue_flags
> > > > (which are passed to enqueue_task()) don't seem to have
> > > > ENQUEUE_RESTORE set?  
> > > 
> > > I was under the impression sched_setscheduler() sets
> > > ENQUEUE_RESTORE... 
> > 
> > Oh, I think it works "by coincidence", as ENQUEUE_RESTORE ==
> > DEQUEUE_SAVE == 0x02 ? :)
> 
> Not sure if this is a conincidence... By looking at the comments in
> sched/sched.h I got the impression the two values match by design (and
> __sched_setscheduler() is using this property to simplify the code :)
> 

Yep, right.

Do you think we might get into trouble with do_set_cpus_allowed()?
Can it happen that we change a task affinity while its deadline is in
the past?