[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1330534998.11248.158.camel@twins>
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 18:03:18 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Lesław Kopeć <leslaw.kopec@...za-klasa.pl>
Cc: Aman Gupta <aman@...1.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Chase Douglas <chase.douglas@...onical.com>,
Damien Wyart <damien.wyart@...e.fr>,
Kyle McMartin <kyle@...hat.com>,
Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@...gle.com>,
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Inconsistent load average on tickless kernels
On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 17:24 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> The only thing I could find is that on nohz we can confuse the per-rq
> sample period, does the below make a difference?
Uhm, something like so that is..
---
kernel/sched/core.c | 3 ++-
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index d7c4322..44f61df 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -2380,7 +2380,8 @@ static void calc_load_account_active(struct rq *this_rq)
if (delta)
atomic_long_add(delta, &calc_load_tasks);
- this_rq->calc_load_update += LOAD_FREQ;
+ while (!time_before(jiffies, this_rq->calc_load_update))
+ this_rq->calc_load_update += LOAD_FREQ;
}
/*
--
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