[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51650185.9060905@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 14:07:01 +0800
From: Michael Wang <wangyun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
CC: Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
Preeti U Murthy <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com,
jkosina@...e.cz, clark.williams@...il.com,
"tony.luck@...el.com" <tony.luck@...el.com>, keescook@...omium.org,
mgorman@...e.de, riel@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [patch v3 6/8] sched: consider runnable load average in move_tasks
On 04/09/2013 03:08 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On 2 April 2013 05:23, Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com> wrote:
>> Except using runnable load average in background, move_tasks is also
>> the key functions in load balance. We need consider the runnable load
>> average in it in order to the apple to apple load comparison.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>
>> ---
>> kernel/sched/fair.c | 11 ++++++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> index 1f9026e..bf4e0d4 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> @@ -3966,6 +3966,15 @@ static unsigned long task_h_load(struct task_struct *p);
>>
>> static const unsigned int sched_nr_migrate_break = 32;
>>
>> +static unsigned long task_h_load_avg(struct task_struct *p)
>> +{
>> + u32 period = p->se.avg.runnable_avg_period;
>> + if (!period)
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + return task_h_load(p) * p->se.avg.runnable_avg_sum / period;
>
> How do you ensure that runnable_avg_period and runnable_avg_sum are
> coherent ? an update of the statistic can occur in the middle of your
> sequence.
Hi, Vincent
Don't we have the 'rq->lock' to protect it?
move_tasks() was invoked with double locked, for all the se on src and
dst rq, no update should happen, isn't it?
Regards,
Michael Wang
>
> Vincent
>
>> +}
>> +
>> /*
>> * move_tasks tries to move up to imbalance weighted load from busiest to
>> * this_rq, as part of a balancing operation within domain "sd".
>> @@ -4001,7 +4010,7 @@ static int move_tasks(struct lb_env *env)
>> if (throttled_lb_pair(task_group(p), env->src_cpu, env->dst_cpu))
>> goto next;
>>
>> - load = task_h_load(p);
>> + load = task_h_load_avg(p);
>>
>> if (sched_feat(LB_MIN) && load < 16 && !env->sd->nr_balance_failed)
>> goto next;
>> --
>> 1.7.12
>>
> --
> 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/
>
--
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