sched: add RT task pushing

This patch adds an algorithm to push extra RT tasks off a run queue to
other CPU runqueues.

When more than one RT task is added to a run queue, this algorithm takes
an assertive approach to push the RT tasks that are not running onto other
run queues that have lower priority.  The way this works is that the highest
RT task that is not running is looked at and we examine the runqueues on
the CPUS for that tasks affinity mask. We find the runqueue with the lowest
prio in the CPU affinity of the picked task, and if it is lower in prio than
the picked task, we push the task onto that CPU runqueue.

We continue pushing RT tasks off the current runqueue until we don't push any
more.  The algorithm stops when the next highest RT task can't preempt any
other processes on other CPUS.

TODO: The algorithm may stop when there are still RT tasks that can be
 migrated. Specifically, if the highest non running RT task CPU affinity
 is restricted to CPUs that are running higher priority tasks, there may
 be a lower priority task queued that has an affinity with a CPU that is
 running a lower priority task that it could be migrated to.  This
 patch set does not address this issue.

Note: checkpatch reveals two over 80 character instances. I'm not sure
 that breaking them up will help visually, so I left them as is.

Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <srostedt@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>

1 files changed, 7 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c
index 6185fa0..97cab60 100644
--- a/kernel/sched.c
+++ b/kernel/sched.c
@@ -1952,6 +1952,8 @@ static void finish_task_switch(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev)
 	prev_state = prev->state;
 	finish_arch_switch(prev);
 	finish_lock_switch(rq, prev);
+	schedule_tail_balance_rt(rq);
+
 	fire_sched_in_preempt_notifiers(current);
 	if (mm)
 		mmdrop(mm);
@@ -2185,11 +2187,13 @@ static void double_rq_unlock(struct rq *rq1, struct rq *rq2)
 /*
  * double_lock_balance - lock the busiest runqueue, this_rq is locked already.
  */
-static void double_lock_balance(struct rq *this_rq, struct rq *busiest)
+static int double_lock_balance(struct rq *this_rq, struct rq *busiest)
 	__releases(this_rq->lock)
 	__acquires(busiest->lock)
 	__acquires(this_rq->lock)
 {
+	int ret = 0;
+
 	if (unlikely(!irqs_disabled())) {
 		/* printk() doesn't work good under rq->lock */
 		spin_unlock(&this_rq->lock);
@@ -2200,9 +2204,11 @@ static void double_lock_balance(struct rq *this_rq, struct rq *busiest)
 			spin_unlock(&this_rq->lock);
 			spin_lock(&busiest->lock);
 			spin_lock(&this_rq->lock);
+			ret = 1;
 		} else
 			spin_lock(&busiest->lock);
 	}
+	return ret;
 }
 
 /*