[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150813023049.GA3523@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 10:30:49 +0800
From: Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@...el.com>
To: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: sync with the cfs_rq when changing sched class
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 04:19:04PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> > > #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> > > /* synchronize task with its prev cfs_rq */
> > > - if (!queued)
> > > - __update_load_avg(cfs_rq->avg.last_update_time, cpu_of(rq_of(cfs_rq)),
> > > - &se->avg, se->on_rq * scale_load_down(se->load.weight),
> > > - cfs_rq->curr == se, NULL);
> > > -
> > > - /* remove our load when we leave */
> > > - cfs_rq->avg.load_avg = max_t(long, cfs_rq->avg.load_avg - se->avg.load_avg, 0);
> > > - cfs_rq->avg.load_sum = max_t(s64, cfs_rq->avg.load_sum - se->avg.load_sum, 0);
> > > - cfs_rq->avg.util_avg = max_t(long, cfs_rq->avg.util_avg - se->avg.util_avg, 0);
> > > - cfs_rq->avg.util_sum = max_t(s32, cfs_rq->avg.util_sum - se->avg.util_sum, 0);
> > > + detach_entity_load_avg(cfs_rq, se);
> > > #endif
> >
> > You changed the logic.
>
> yes, i changed it. but i think that calling __update_load_avg() is not
> a problem even in case of "queued == 1". so i didn't think that change
> seriously.
>
> wrong? :(
>
It is not a problem, but any good or maybe any bad? And I would suggest you
add the comment I gave you.
--
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