[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140729011713.GD5203@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 09:17:13 +0800
From: Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@...el.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"pjt@...gle.com" <pjt@...gle.com>,
"bsegall@...gle.com" <bsegall@...gle.com>,
"arjan.van.de.ven@...el.com" <arjan.van.de.ven@...el.com>,
"len.brown@...el.com" <len.brown@...el.com>,
"rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
"alan.cox@...el.com" <alan.cox@...el.com>,
"mark.gross@...el.com" <mark.gross@...el.com>,
"fengguang.wu@...el.com" <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2 v4] sched: Rewrite per entity runnable load average
tracking
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 12:38:12PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 03:02:37AM +0800, Yuyang Du wrote:
> > > Another thing that might be an issue is that the blocked of a terminated
> > > task lives on for quite a while until has decayed away.
> >
> > Good point. To do so, if I read correctly, we need to hook do_exit(), but probably
> > we are gonna encounter rq->lock issue.
> >
> > What is the opinion/guidance from the maintainers/others?
>
> So the entire point of this per entity tracking was to make sure load
> numbers reflect reality. We account migrations etc., it would be weird
> to then throw all that out the window and let task exit accumulate crap.
>
Yes. So I will hook up do_exit. Hope I did it right. Likewise, also do group entity
in group destroy and group offline?
--
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