[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130419105855.GA30060@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 12:58:55 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] sched: move content out of core files for load
average
* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-04-19 at 10:25 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > It might eventually make sense to integrate the 'average load'
> > calculation as well
> > with all this - as they really have a similar purpose, the avenload[]
> > vector of
> > averages is conceptually similar to the rq->cpu_load[] vector of
> > averages.
>
> The /proc/loadavg definition isn't useful for anything remotely sane
> wrt load-balancing or otherwise, so I don't really see that integration
> happening (its a measure of how many tasks are blocked, where the
> load-balancer needs a measure of how many tasks are wanting to run).
Well, loadavg also includes running tasks:
nr_active = this_rq->nr_running;
nr_active += (long) this_rq->nr_uninterruptible;
but yeah, the two are not the same. It could at least integrate in terms
of averaging code, working on two different instances of data structures -
but yeah, full integration is indeed not possible.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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