[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171220140906.oied65gn6afvvafc@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2017 15:09:06 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Brendan Jackman <brendan.jackman@....com>
Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] sched: force update of blocked load of idle cpus
On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 06:01:56PM +0000, Brendan Jackman wrote:
> @@ -9210,7 +9256,15 @@ static void nohz_idle_balance(struct rq *this_rq, enum cpu_idle_type idle)
> cpu_load_update_idle(rq);
> rq_unlock_irq(rq, &rf);
>
> - rebalance_domains(rq, CPU_IDLE);
> + update_blocked_averages(balance_cpu);
> + /*
> + * This idle load balance softirq may have been
> + * triggered only to update the blocked load and shares
> + * of idle CPUs (which we have just done for
> + * balance_cpu). In that case skip the actual balance.
> + */
> + if (!in_nohz_stats_kick(this_cpu))
> + rebalance_domains(rq, idle);
> }
>
> if (time_after(next_balance, rq->next_balance)) {
> @@ -9336,7 +9396,12 @@ static __latent_entropy void run_rebalance_domains(struct softirq_action *h)
> * and abort nohz_idle_balance altogether if we pull some load.
> */
> nohz_idle_balance(this_rq, idle);
> - rebalance_domains(this_rq, idle);
> + update_blocked_averages(this_rq->cpu);
> + if (!in_nohz_stats_kick(this_rq->cpu))
> + rebalance_domains(this_rq, idle);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON
> + clear_bit(NOHZ_STATS_KICK, nohz_flags(this_rq->cpu));
> +#endif
> }
>
> /*
You're doing the same thing to both (all) callsites of
rebalance_domains(), does that not suggest doing it inside and leaving
update_blocked_averages() where it is?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists