[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1305561903.2466.4458.camel@twins>
Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 18:05:03 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Bharata B Rao <bharata@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Dhaval Giani <dhaval.giani@...il.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ibm.com>,
Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
Nikhil Rao <ncrao@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 08/15] sched: throttle cfs_rq entities which exceed
their local runtime
On Tue, 2011-05-03 at 02:28 -0700, Paul Turner wrote:
> + task_delta = -cfs_rq->h_nr_running;
> + for_each_sched_entity(se) {
> + struct cfs_rq *qcfs_rq = cfs_rq_of(se);
> + /* throttled entity or throttle-on-deactivate */
> + if (!se->on_rq)
> + break;
> +
> + if (dequeue)
> + dequeue_entity(qcfs_rq, se, DEQUEUE_SLEEP);
> + qcfs_rq->h_nr_running += task_delta;
> +
> + if (qcfs_rq->load.weight)
> + dequeue = 0;
> + }
> +
> + if (!se)
> + rq->nr_running += task_delta;
So throttle is like dequeue, it removes tasks, so why then insist on
writing it like its adding tasks? (I see you're adding a negative
number, but its all just weird).
--
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