[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51600BBE.7060506@intel.com>
Date: Sat, 06 Apr 2013 19:49:18 +0800
From: Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
CC: mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, arjan@...ux.intel.com, bp@...en8.de,
pjt@...gle.com, efault@....de, morten.rasmussen@....com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, viresh.kumar@...aro.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, len.brown@...el.com,
rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com, jkosina@...e.cz,
clark.williams@...il.com, tony.luck@...el.com,
keescook@...omium.org, mgorman@...e.de, riel@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [patch v7 15/21] sched: pull all tasks from source group
On 04/04/2013 01:59 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>> > - if (capacity && rq->nr_running == 1 && wl > env->imbalance)
>> > + if (rq->nr_running == 0 ||
>> > + (!(env->flags & LBF_POWER_BAL) && capacity &&
>> > + rq->nr_running == 1 && wl > env->imbalance))
> Just out of curious.
>
> In load_balance(), we only move normal tasks, right?
>
> Then shouldn't it check rq->cfs.h_nr_running rather than rq->nr_running?
Yes, it seems so.
What's your opinion of this, Peter?
--
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