[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1236519330.5933.7.camel@marge.simson.net>
Date: Sun, 08 Mar 2009 14:35:30 +0100
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: Balazs Scheidler <bazsi@...abit.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: scheduler oddity [bug?]
On Sun, 2009-03-08 at 11:19 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Wouldn't something like the below be more suited:
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c
> index 89e2ca0..94c8b02 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched.c
> @@ -2501,7 +2501,7 @@ static void __sched_fork(struct task_struct *p)
> p->se.prev_sum_exec_runtime = 0;
> p->se.nr_migrations = 0;
> p->se.last_wakeup = 0;
> - p->se.avg_overlap = 0;
> + p->se.avg_overlap = sysctl_sched_migration_cost;
> p->se.start_runtime = 0;
> p->se.avg_wakeup = sysctl_sched_wakeup_granularity;
>
Dunno exactly what we need to do here. My hacklet certainly ain't it,
but I suspect this isn't going to work out either. Having tasks begin
life at zero or sysctl_sched_migration_cost won't matter much methinks.
-Mike
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists