[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <518AFAC6.5010906@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 09 May 2013 09:24:22 +0800
From: Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>
To: Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>
CC: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Preeti U Murthy <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Michael Wang <wangyun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 6/7] sched: consider runnable load average in move_tasks
Paul,
I am wondering if the following patch needed.
The wakeuped migrated task will __synchronize_entity_decay(se); in migrate_task_fair,
then it needs to set `se->avg.last_runnable_update -= (-se->avg.decay_count) << 20'
before update_entity_load_avg, in order to avoid slept time is updated twice for
se.avg.load_avg_contrib in both __syncchronize and update_entity_load_avg.
but if the slept task is waked up from self cpu, it miss the last_runnable_update before
update_entity_load_avg(se, 0, 1), so the slept time was used twice in both functions.
Is that right?
Regards
Alex
---
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index a80ae94..1b49e97 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -1532,7 +1532,8 @@ static inline void enqueue_entity_load_avg(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq,
}
wakeup = 0;
} else {
- __synchronize_entity_decay(se);
+ se->avg.last_runnable_update += __synchronize_entity_decay(se)
+ << 20;
}
/* migrated tasks did not contribute to our blocked load */
if (wakeup) {
subtract_blocked_load_contrib(cfs_rq, se->avg.load_avg_contrib);
update_entity_load_avg(se, 0, 1);
}
--
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