[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1289563959.2084.241.camel@laptop>
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 13:12:39 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ibm.com>,
Chris Friesen <cfriesen@...tel.com>,
Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Pierre Bourdon <pbourdon@...ellency.fr>,
Bharata B Rao <bharata@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Karl Rister <kmr@...ibm.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [tg_shares_up rewrite v3 09/11] sched: demand based
update_cfs_load()
On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 11:53 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 19:24 -0800, Paul Turner wrote:
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED
> > + cfs_rq->load_unacc_exec_time += delta_exec;
> > + if (cfs_rq->load_unacc_exec_time > sysctl_sched_shares_window)
> > {
> > + update_cfs_load(cfs_rq);
> > + update_cfs_shares(cfs_rq, 0);
>
> Why not:
> + cfs_rq->load_unacc_exec_time -= sysctl_sched_shares_window;
>
> (although you probably want to read the sysctl value into a local
> variable using ACCESS_ONCE() and use that for both cases).
Ah, I see why not, still that reset looks better here than in that other
function.
--
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