[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150220162641.GS5029@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2015 17:26:41 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Preeti U Murthy <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Morten Rasmussen <Morten.Rasmussen@....com>,
Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Linaro Kernel Mailman List <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v9 10/10] sched: move cfs task on a CPU with
higher capacity
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 02:54:09PM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> >> if (rq->nr_running >= 2)
> >> + return true;
> >
> > So this,
> >> + sd = rcu_dereference(rq->sd);
> >> + if (sd) {
> >> + if ((rq->cfs.h_nr_running >= 1) &&
> >> + check_cpu_capacity(rq, sd)) {
> >> + kick = true;
> >> + goto unlock;
> >> + }
> >> + }
> >
> > vs this: how would we ever get here?
> >
> > If h_nr_running > 1, must then not nr_running > 1 as well?
>
> you're right,
> but the test above can trig a kick with h_nr_running == 1 whereas the
> other tests may not
Duh, clearly I cannot read today.
--
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