[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1301087183.2250.306.camel@laptop>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 22:06:23 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@...gle.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@....ibm.com>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
Andreas Herrmann <andreas.herrmann3@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 09/14] sched: Dynamically allocate
sched_domain/sched_group data-structures
On Fri, 2011-03-18 at 18:23 -0700, Venkatesh Pallipadi wrote:
> > if (affine_sd) {
> > - if (cpu == prev_cpu || wake_affine(affine_sd, p, sync))
> > - return select_idle_sibling(p, cpu);
> > - else
> > - return select_idle_sibling(p, prev_cpu);
> > + if (wake_affine(affine_sd, p, sync))
> > + prev_cpu = cpu;
> > +
> > + new_cpu = select_idle_sibling(p, prev_cpu);
> > + goto unlock;
> > }
> >
> > while (sd) {
>
> This would result in going through wake_affine() doing all
> effective_load stuff even with cpu == prev_cpu. No?
> So, we need either if (cpu != prev_cpu && wake_affine(affine_sd, p,
> sync)) or an check at the start to have want_affine=0 for this case.
D'0h yeah, I missed the conditional execution of wake_affine there, silly me.
--
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