What's the priority of the idle task?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
1
down vote

favorite
1












As explained by several (somewhat old) articles, the Linux idle task (PID=0, one per CPU) is run when there are no other tasks to run. To get the scheduler do this, the idle task must have the lowest priority reserved for it. That old Documentation/ftrace.txt in the linked LWN article explicitly says that




The prio "140" is reserved for the idle task which is the lowest priority thread (pid 0).




This makes sense, but under Linux 4.9



# perf record -e sched:sched_switch sleep 1
# perf script
sleep 6526 [000] 362661.310842: sched:sched_switch: sleep:6526 [120] S ==> swapper/0:0 [120]


reports a priority of 120 for swapper/0 (in the closing bracket), contradicting the above.



How does the Linux scheduler handle the idle task nowadays? The commits changing ftrace.txt (87d80de28, 294ae4011) didn't help.







share|improve this question
























    up vote
    1
    down vote

    favorite
    1












    As explained by several (somewhat old) articles, the Linux idle task (PID=0, one per CPU) is run when there are no other tasks to run. To get the scheduler do this, the idle task must have the lowest priority reserved for it. That old Documentation/ftrace.txt in the linked LWN article explicitly says that




    The prio "140" is reserved for the idle task which is the lowest priority thread (pid 0).




    This makes sense, but under Linux 4.9



    # perf record -e sched:sched_switch sleep 1
    # perf script
    sleep 6526 [000] 362661.310842: sched:sched_switch: sleep:6526 [120] S ==> swapper/0:0 [120]


    reports a priority of 120 for swapper/0 (in the closing bracket), contradicting the above.



    How does the Linux scheduler handle the idle task nowadays? The commits changing ftrace.txt (87d80de28, 294ae4011) didn't help.







    share|improve this question






















      up vote
      1
      down vote

      favorite
      1









      up vote
      1
      down vote

      favorite
      1






      1





      As explained by several (somewhat old) articles, the Linux idle task (PID=0, one per CPU) is run when there are no other tasks to run. To get the scheduler do this, the idle task must have the lowest priority reserved for it. That old Documentation/ftrace.txt in the linked LWN article explicitly says that




      The prio "140" is reserved for the idle task which is the lowest priority thread (pid 0).




      This makes sense, but under Linux 4.9



      # perf record -e sched:sched_switch sleep 1
      # perf script
      sleep 6526 [000] 362661.310842: sched:sched_switch: sleep:6526 [120] S ==> swapper/0:0 [120]


      reports a priority of 120 for swapper/0 (in the closing bracket), contradicting the above.



      How does the Linux scheduler handle the idle task nowadays? The commits changing ftrace.txt (87d80de28, 294ae4011) didn't help.







      share|improve this question












      As explained by several (somewhat old) articles, the Linux idle task (PID=0, one per CPU) is run when there are no other tasks to run. To get the scheduler do this, the idle task must have the lowest priority reserved for it. That old Documentation/ftrace.txt in the linked LWN article explicitly says that




      The prio "140" is reserved for the idle task which is the lowest priority thread (pid 0).




      This makes sense, but under Linux 4.9



      # perf record -e sched:sched_switch sleep 1
      # perf script
      sleep 6526 [000] 362661.310842: sched:sched_switch: sleep:6526 [120] S ==> swapper/0:0 [120]


      reports a priority of 120 for swapper/0 (in the closing bracket), contradicting the above.



      How does the Linux scheduler handle the idle task nowadays? The commits changing ftrace.txt (87d80de28, 294ae4011) didn't help.









      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked Apr 2 at 17:22









      Ferenc Wágner

      2,704920




      2,704920




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          0
          down vote



          accepted










          I got a nice answer from Till Smejkal on the Linux Kernel Mailing List:




          The idle task has its own scheduling class that only handles the idle threads per CPU
          core. This scheduling class has the lowest priority of the scheduling classes
          available in the kernel. This means that it is the last one in the list of scheduling
          classes that are asked at a task switch whether they have a task to schedule on the
          CPU. Hence, the idle task is not managed by CFS and accordingly doesn't have any nice
          value or priority (or at least it is not important nowadays). Interesting files in
          the kernel source that might contain more information are kernel/sched/idle_task.c,
          kernel/sched/sched.h and kernel/sched/core.c.




          However, according to my understanding, tasks can have a priority despite not being managed by CFS: realtime tasks (SCHED_FIFO and SCHED_RR) belong to rt_sched_class and certainly have meaningful priorities (as required by POSIX):



          static inline int rt_policy(int policy)



          But the main point now is scheduling class priorities, which is implemented by the following const struct sched_class structures being linked by their .next pointers in this order:



          stop_sched_class
          dl_sched_class
          rt_sched_class
          fair_sched_class
          idle_sched_class


          This linked list is walked by (kernel/sched/sched.h)



          #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
          #define sched_class_highest (&stop_sched_class)
          #else
          #define sched_class_highest (&dl_sched_class)
          #endif
          #define for_each_class(class)
          for (class = sched_class_highest; class; class = class->next)


          As alluded to in the above quote, pick_next_task() in kernel/sched/core.c asks each class for a runnable task like this:



          again:
          for_each_class(class)
          p = class->pick_next_task(rq, prev, rf);
          if (p)
          if (unlikely(p == RETRY_TASK))
          goto again;
          return p;




          All this means that the idle tasks happen to have a priority value (some default), but it's never consulted during scheduling decisions, because they are the only tasks (pinned to particular CPUs) in idle_sched_class.



          The above leaves the question of the changed priority value open, but that's mostly of historical significance by now (the above code quotes are from Linux 4.16).






          share|improve this answer




















            Your Answer







            StackExchange.ready(function()
            var channelOptions =
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "106"
            ;
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
            createEditor();
            );

            else
            createEditor();

            );

            function createEditor()
            StackExchange.prepareEditor(
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: false,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            );



            );








             

            draft saved


            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f435089%2fwhats-the-priority-of-the-idle-task%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest






























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            0
            down vote



            accepted










            I got a nice answer from Till Smejkal on the Linux Kernel Mailing List:




            The idle task has its own scheduling class that only handles the idle threads per CPU
            core. This scheduling class has the lowest priority of the scheduling classes
            available in the kernel. This means that it is the last one in the list of scheduling
            classes that are asked at a task switch whether they have a task to schedule on the
            CPU. Hence, the idle task is not managed by CFS and accordingly doesn't have any nice
            value or priority (or at least it is not important nowadays). Interesting files in
            the kernel source that might contain more information are kernel/sched/idle_task.c,
            kernel/sched/sched.h and kernel/sched/core.c.




            However, according to my understanding, tasks can have a priority despite not being managed by CFS: realtime tasks (SCHED_FIFO and SCHED_RR) belong to rt_sched_class and certainly have meaningful priorities (as required by POSIX):



            static inline int rt_policy(int policy)



            But the main point now is scheduling class priorities, which is implemented by the following const struct sched_class structures being linked by their .next pointers in this order:



            stop_sched_class
            dl_sched_class
            rt_sched_class
            fair_sched_class
            idle_sched_class


            This linked list is walked by (kernel/sched/sched.h)



            #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
            #define sched_class_highest (&stop_sched_class)
            #else
            #define sched_class_highest (&dl_sched_class)
            #endif
            #define for_each_class(class)
            for (class = sched_class_highest; class; class = class->next)


            As alluded to in the above quote, pick_next_task() in kernel/sched/core.c asks each class for a runnable task like this:



            again:
            for_each_class(class)
            p = class->pick_next_task(rq, prev, rf);
            if (p)
            if (unlikely(p == RETRY_TASK))
            goto again;
            return p;




            All this means that the idle tasks happen to have a priority value (some default), but it's never consulted during scheduling decisions, because they are the only tasks (pinned to particular CPUs) in idle_sched_class.



            The above leaves the question of the changed priority value open, but that's mostly of historical significance by now (the above code quotes are from Linux 4.16).






            share|improve this answer
























              up vote
              0
              down vote



              accepted










              I got a nice answer from Till Smejkal on the Linux Kernel Mailing List:




              The idle task has its own scheduling class that only handles the idle threads per CPU
              core. This scheduling class has the lowest priority of the scheduling classes
              available in the kernel. This means that it is the last one in the list of scheduling
              classes that are asked at a task switch whether they have a task to schedule on the
              CPU. Hence, the idle task is not managed by CFS and accordingly doesn't have any nice
              value or priority (or at least it is not important nowadays). Interesting files in
              the kernel source that might contain more information are kernel/sched/idle_task.c,
              kernel/sched/sched.h and kernel/sched/core.c.




              However, according to my understanding, tasks can have a priority despite not being managed by CFS: realtime tasks (SCHED_FIFO and SCHED_RR) belong to rt_sched_class and certainly have meaningful priorities (as required by POSIX):



              static inline int rt_policy(int policy)



              But the main point now is scheduling class priorities, which is implemented by the following const struct sched_class structures being linked by their .next pointers in this order:



              stop_sched_class
              dl_sched_class
              rt_sched_class
              fair_sched_class
              idle_sched_class


              This linked list is walked by (kernel/sched/sched.h)



              #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
              #define sched_class_highest (&stop_sched_class)
              #else
              #define sched_class_highest (&dl_sched_class)
              #endif
              #define for_each_class(class)
              for (class = sched_class_highest; class; class = class->next)


              As alluded to in the above quote, pick_next_task() in kernel/sched/core.c asks each class for a runnable task like this:



              again:
              for_each_class(class)
              p = class->pick_next_task(rq, prev, rf);
              if (p)
              if (unlikely(p == RETRY_TASK))
              goto again;
              return p;




              All this means that the idle tasks happen to have a priority value (some default), but it's never consulted during scheduling decisions, because they are the only tasks (pinned to particular CPUs) in idle_sched_class.



              The above leaves the question of the changed priority value open, but that's mostly of historical significance by now (the above code quotes are from Linux 4.16).






              share|improve this answer






















                up vote
                0
                down vote



                accepted







                up vote
                0
                down vote



                accepted






                I got a nice answer from Till Smejkal on the Linux Kernel Mailing List:




                The idle task has its own scheduling class that only handles the idle threads per CPU
                core. This scheduling class has the lowest priority of the scheduling classes
                available in the kernel. This means that it is the last one in the list of scheduling
                classes that are asked at a task switch whether they have a task to schedule on the
                CPU. Hence, the idle task is not managed by CFS and accordingly doesn't have any nice
                value or priority (or at least it is not important nowadays). Interesting files in
                the kernel source that might contain more information are kernel/sched/idle_task.c,
                kernel/sched/sched.h and kernel/sched/core.c.




                However, according to my understanding, tasks can have a priority despite not being managed by CFS: realtime tasks (SCHED_FIFO and SCHED_RR) belong to rt_sched_class and certainly have meaningful priorities (as required by POSIX):



                static inline int rt_policy(int policy)



                But the main point now is scheduling class priorities, which is implemented by the following const struct sched_class structures being linked by their .next pointers in this order:



                stop_sched_class
                dl_sched_class
                rt_sched_class
                fair_sched_class
                idle_sched_class


                This linked list is walked by (kernel/sched/sched.h)



                #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
                #define sched_class_highest (&stop_sched_class)
                #else
                #define sched_class_highest (&dl_sched_class)
                #endif
                #define for_each_class(class)
                for (class = sched_class_highest; class; class = class->next)


                As alluded to in the above quote, pick_next_task() in kernel/sched/core.c asks each class for a runnable task like this:



                again:
                for_each_class(class)
                p = class->pick_next_task(rq, prev, rf);
                if (p)
                if (unlikely(p == RETRY_TASK))
                goto again;
                return p;




                All this means that the idle tasks happen to have a priority value (some default), but it's never consulted during scheduling decisions, because they are the only tasks (pinned to particular CPUs) in idle_sched_class.



                The above leaves the question of the changed priority value open, but that's mostly of historical significance by now (the above code quotes are from Linux 4.16).






                share|improve this answer












                I got a nice answer from Till Smejkal on the Linux Kernel Mailing List:




                The idle task has its own scheduling class that only handles the idle threads per CPU
                core. This scheduling class has the lowest priority of the scheduling classes
                available in the kernel. This means that it is the last one in the list of scheduling
                classes that are asked at a task switch whether they have a task to schedule on the
                CPU. Hence, the idle task is not managed by CFS and accordingly doesn't have any nice
                value or priority (or at least it is not important nowadays). Interesting files in
                the kernel source that might contain more information are kernel/sched/idle_task.c,
                kernel/sched/sched.h and kernel/sched/core.c.




                However, according to my understanding, tasks can have a priority despite not being managed by CFS: realtime tasks (SCHED_FIFO and SCHED_RR) belong to rt_sched_class and certainly have meaningful priorities (as required by POSIX):



                static inline int rt_policy(int policy)



                But the main point now is scheduling class priorities, which is implemented by the following const struct sched_class structures being linked by their .next pointers in this order:



                stop_sched_class
                dl_sched_class
                rt_sched_class
                fair_sched_class
                idle_sched_class


                This linked list is walked by (kernel/sched/sched.h)



                #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
                #define sched_class_highest (&stop_sched_class)
                #else
                #define sched_class_highest (&dl_sched_class)
                #endif
                #define for_each_class(class)
                for (class = sched_class_highest; class; class = class->next)


                As alluded to in the above quote, pick_next_task() in kernel/sched/core.c asks each class for a runnable task like this:



                again:
                for_each_class(class)
                p = class->pick_next_task(rq, prev, rf);
                if (p)
                if (unlikely(p == RETRY_TASK))
                goto again;
                return p;




                All this means that the idle tasks happen to have a priority value (some default), but it's never consulted during scheduling decisions, because they are the only tasks (pinned to particular CPUs) in idle_sched_class.



                The above leaves the question of the changed priority value open, but that's mostly of historical significance by now (the above code quotes are from Linux 4.16).







                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered Apr 9 at 17:32









                Ferenc Wágner

                2,704920




                2,704920






















                     

                    draft saved


                    draft discarded


























                     


                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function ()
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f435089%2fwhats-the-priority-of-the-idle-task%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                    );

                    Post as a guest













































































                    Popular posts from this blog

                    How to check contact read email or not when send email to Individual?

                    Bahrain

                    Postfix configuration issue with fips on centos 7; mailgun relay