[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140424103059.GL2500@e103034-lin>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:30:59 +0100
From: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>
To: Jason Low <jason.low2@...com>
Cc: "mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"daniel.lezcano@...aro.org" <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
"alex.shi@...aro.org" <alex.shi@...aro.org>,
"preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"efault@....de" <efault@....de>,
"vincent.guittot@...aro.org" <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
"aswin@...com" <aswin@...com>,
"chegu_vinod@...com" <chegu_vinod@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] sched, fair: Stop searching for tasks in newidle
balance if there are runnable tasks
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 02:30:35AM +0100, Jason Low wrote:
> @@ -6704,7 +6703,12 @@ static int idle_balance(struct rq *this_rq)
> interval = msecs_to_jiffies(sd->balance_interval);
> if (time_after(next_balance, sd->last_balance + interval))
> next_balance = sd->last_balance + interval;
> - if (pulled_task)
> +
> + /*
> + * Stop searching for tasks to pull if there are
> + * now runnable tasks on this rq.
> + */
> + if (pulled_task || this_rq->nr_running > 0)
Should this be cfs tasks instead?
+ if (pulled_task || this_rq->cfs.h_nr_running > 0)
3.15-rc2 commit 35805ff8f4fc535ac85330170d3c56829c87c677 seems to
indicate that using rq->nr_running may lead to trouble.
The other two patches look good to me.
Morten
--
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