[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKfTPtCjb2PRxgs9nABw2V_MJq2wi=0DTpm+wEvvSX7qnAp+VA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2019 10:48:48 +0100
From: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
To: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Morten Rasmussen <Morten.Rasmussen@....com>,
Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>,
Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>, Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
Thara Gopinath <thara.gopinath@...aro.org>,
pkondeti@...eaurora.org, Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/3] sched/fair: update scale invariance of PELT
On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 09:26, Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com> wrote:
>
> On 1/16/19 10:43 AM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > +static inline u64 rq_clock_pelt(struct rq *rq)
> > +{
>
> Doesn't this function need
>
> lockdep_assert_held(&rq->lock);
> assert_clock_updated(rq);
originally, it was replacing cfs_rq_clock_task which doesn't have this
debugging code.
But it also replaces rq_clock_task for deadline and rt so it's
probably worthing adding them for such case
>
> like rq_clock() and rq_clock_task()? Later to support commit
> cb42c9a3ebbb "sched/core: Add debugging code to catch missing
> update_rq_clock() calls".
>
> > + return rq->clock_pelt - rq->lost_idle_time;
> > +}
>
> [...]
Powered by blists - more mailing lists