[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6f372bce-151e-79e1-2fda-d8b2bcf777d6@linux.alibaba.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2020 16:42:21 +0800
From: Peng Wang <rocking@...ux.alibaba.com>
To: mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com, mgorman@...e.de
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Simplify the code of should_we_balance()
On 4/11/20 5:20 PM, Peng Wang wrote:
> We only consider group_balance_cpu() after there is no idle
> cpu. So, just do comparison before return at these two cases.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peng Wang <rocking@...ux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> kernel/sched/fair.c | 16 +++++-----------
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 1ea3ddd..81b2c647 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -9413,7 +9413,7 @@ static int active_load_balance_cpu_stop(void *data);
> static int should_we_balance(struct lb_env *env)
> {
> struct sched_group *sg = env->sd->groups;
> - int cpu, balance_cpu = -1;
> + int cpu;
>
> /*
> * Ensure the balancing environment is consistent; can happen
> @@ -9434,18 +9434,12 @@ static int should_we_balance(struct lb_env *env)
> if (!idle_cpu(cpu))
> continue;
>
> - balance_cpu = cpu;
> - break;
> + /* Are we the first idle CPU? */
> + return cpu == env->dst_cpu;
> }
>
> - if (balance_cpu == -1)
> - balance_cpu = group_balance_cpu(sg);
> -
> - /*
> - * First idle CPU or the first CPU(busiest) in this sched group
> - * is eligible for doing load balancing at this and above domains.
> - */
> - return balance_cpu == env->dst_cpu;
> + /* Are we the first balance CPU of this group? */
> + return group_balance_cpu(sg) == env->dst_cpu;
> }
>
> /*
>
+juri.lelli@...hat.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists