[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <514BB452.2070906@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 09:30:58 +0800
From: Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>
To: Preeti U Murthy <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC: mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, efault@....de,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, arjan@...ux.intel.com, bp@...en8.de,
pjt@...gle.com, namhyung@...nel.org, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, viresh.kumar@...aro.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, morten.rasmussen@....com
Subject: Re: [patch v5 14/15] sched: power aware load balance
On 03/21/2013 06:27 PM, Preeti U Murthy wrote:
>> > did you close all of background system services?
>> > In theory the rq->avg.runnable_avg_sum should be zero if there is no
>> > task a bit long, otherwise there are some bugs in kernel.
> Could you explain why rq->avg.runnable_avg_sum should be zero? What if
> some kernel thread ran on this run queue and is now finished? Its
> utilisation would be say x.How would that ever drop to 0,even if nothing
> ran on it later?
the value get from decay_load():
sa->runnable_avg_sum = decay_load(sa->runnable_avg_sum,
in decay_load it is possible to be set zero.
and /proc/sched_debug also approve this:
.tg_runnable_contrib : 0
.tg->runnable_avg : 50
.avg->runnable_avg_sum : 0
.avg->runnable_avg_period : 47507
--
Thanks Alex
--
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