[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160114212704.GJ6357@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 22:27:04 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>,
Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...hip.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@...hat.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] sched: Improve cpu load accounting with nohz
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 09:19:00PM +0000, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> @@ -4346,7 +4346,10 @@ static void __update_cpu_load(struct rq *this_rq, unsigned long this_load,
>
> /* scale is effectively 1 << i now, and >> i divides by scale */
>
> - old_load = this_rq->cpu_load[i] - tickless_load;
> + if (this_rq->cpu_load[i] > tickless_load)
> + old_load = this_rq->cpu_load[i] - tickless_load;
> + else
> + old_load = 0;
Yeah, yuck. That'd go bad quick.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists