[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160405191739.44398c77@utopia>
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2016 19:17:39 +0200
From: luca abeni <luca.abeni@...tn.it>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 3/7] Improve the tracking of active utilisation
On Tue, 5 Apr 2016 16:48:03 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 05:12:29PM +0200, Luca Abeni wrote:
> > + /*
> > + * We cannot use inactive_task_timer() to invoke sub_running_bw()
> > + * at the 0-lag time, because the task could have been migrated
> > + * while SCHED_OTHER in the meanwhile.
> > + */
> > + if (hrtimer_active(&p->dl.inactive_timer) &&
> > + !hrtimer_callback_running(&p->dl.inactive_timer))
> > sub_running_bw(&p->dl, &rq->dl);
>
> hrtimer_is_queued() ?
Uhm... I do not remember why I used this condition, but hrtimer_is_queued()
should be the right thing to be used, yes... I'll update the patch.
Thanks,
Luca
Powered by blists - more mailing lists