[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <jhj4kiht7oh.mognet@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2021 19:19:58 +0000
From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>, mingo@...hat.com,
peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com,
mgorman@...e.de, bristot@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
joel@...lfernandes.org
Cc: fweisbec@...il.com, tglx@...utronix.de, qais.yousef@....com,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7 v3] sched/fair: reduce the window for duplicated update
On 12/02/21 15:17, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> Start to update last_blocked_load_update_tick to reduce the possibility
> of another cpu starting the update one more time
>
IIUC this can happen if e.g. a CPU is busy updating load in
update_blocked_averages() while another enters update_nohz_stats() for the
same rq. They'll be serialized by the RQ lock, but both can still enter
update_blocked_averages() at roughly the same time.
Shouldn't then the rq->last_blocked_load_update_tick check be either
deferred to or re-done within update_blocked_averages(), with the rq lock
held?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists