[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150713082609.GU19282@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 10:26:09 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: byungchul.park@....com
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, pjt@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched: let __sched_period() use rq's nr_running
On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 05:11:30PM +0900, byungchul.park@....com wrote:
> From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
>
> __sched_period() returns a period which a rq can have. the period has to be
> stretched by the number of task *the rq has*, when nr_running > nr_latency.
> otherwise, task slice can be very smaller than sysctl_sched_min_granularity
> depending on the position of tg hierarchy when CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED.
>
> Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
> ---
> kernel/sched/fair.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 09456fc..8ae7aeb 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -635,7 +635,7 @@ static u64 __sched_period(unsigned long nr_running)
> */
> static u64 sched_slice(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se)
> {
> - u64 slice = __sched_period(cfs_rq->nr_running + !se->on_rq);
> + u64 slice = __sched_period(rq_of(cfs_rq)->nr_running + !se->on_rq);
>
> for_each_sched_entity(se) {
> struct load_weight *load;
This really doesn't make sense; look at what that
for_each_sched_entity() loop does below this.
I agree that sched_slice() is a difficult proposition in the face of
cgroup, but everything is, cgroups suck arse, they make everything hard.
--
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