[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5152768B.3020306@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 10:03:15 +0530
From: Preeti U Murthy <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org, mingo@...nel.org,
linux@....linux.org.uk, pjt@...gle.com, santosh.shilimkar@...com,
morten.rasmussen@....com, chander.kashyap@...aro.org,
cmetcalf@...era.com, tony.luck@...el.com, alex.shi@...el.com,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
len.brown@...el.com, arjan@...ux.intel.com,
amit.kucheria@...aro.org, corbet@....net
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 3/6] sched: pack small tasks
Hi Peter,
On 03/26/2013 06:07 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-03-22 at 13:25 +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>> +static bool is_light_task(struct task_struct *p)
>> +{
>> + /* A light task runs less than 20% in average */
>> + return ((p->se.avg.runnable_avg_sum * 5) <
>> + (p->se.avg.runnable_avg_period));
>> +}
>
> OK, so we have a 'problem' here, we initialize runnable_avg_* to 0, but
> we want to 'assume' a fresh task is fully 'loaded'. IIRC Alex ran into
> this as well.
>
> PJT, do you have any sane solution for this, I forgot what the result
> of the last discussion was -- was there any?
The conclusion after last discussion between PJT and Alex was that the
load contribution of a fresh task be set to "full" during "__sched_fork()".
task->se.avg.load_avg_contrib = task->se.load.weight during
__sched_fork() is reflected in the latest power aware scheduler patchset
by Alex.
Thanks
Regards
Preeti U Murthy
>
--
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