[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5da6abab-00ff-9bb4-f24b-0bf5dfcd4c35@arm.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 13:07:33 +0200
From: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
To: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>, peterz@...radead.org,
mingo@...hat.com, rostedt@...dmis.org, tj@...nel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, luca.abeni@...tannapisa.it,
claudio@...dence.eu.com, tommaso.cucinotta@...tannapisa.it,
bristot@...hat.com, mathieu.poirier@...aro.org, lizefan@...wei.com,
longman@...hat.com, cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 4/8] sched/deadline: Fix bandwidth accounting at all
levels after offline migration
On 7/19/19 3:59 PM, Juri Lelli wrote:
[...]
> @@ -557,6 +558,38 @@ static struct rq *dl_task_offline_migration(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p
> double_lock_balance(rq, later_rq);
> }
>
> + if (p->dl.dl_non_contending || p->dl.dl_throttled) {
> + /*
> + * Inactive timer is armed (or callback is running, but
> + * waiting for us to release rq locks). In any case, when it
> + * will file (or continue), it will see running_bw of this
s/file/fire ?
> + * task migrated to later_rq (and correctly handle it).
Is this because of dl_task_timer()->enqueue_task_dl()->task_contending()
setting dl_se->dl_non_contending = 0 ?
[...]
Powered by blists - more mailing lists