[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <xhsmh34n7xv1k.mognet@vschneid-thinkpadt14sgen2i.remote.csb>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2024 12:23:19 +0200
From: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, juri.lelli@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com,
mgorman@...e.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kprateek.nayak@....com,
wuyun.abel@...edance.com, youssefesmat@...omium.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
efault@....de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 19/24] sched/eevdf: Fixup PELT vs DELAYED_DEQUEUE
On 14/08/24 09:25, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 12:18:07AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 13, 2024 at 02:43:56PM +0200, Valentin Schneider wrote:
>> > On 27/07/24 12:27, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> > > @@ -6814,6 +6815,7 @@ requeue_delayed_entity(struct sched_enti
>> > > }
>> > >
>> > > se->sched_delayed = 0;
>> > > + update_load_avg(cfs_rq, se, 0);
>> >
>> > Ditto on the ordering
>>
>> Bah, so I remember thinking about it and then I obviously go and do it
>> the exact wrong way around eh? Let me double check this tomorrow morning
>> with the brain slightly more awake :/
>
> OK, so I went over it again and I ended up with the below diff -- which
> assuming I didn't make a giant mess of things *again*, I should go fold
> back into various other patches ...
>
Looks right to me, thanks! I'll go test the newer stack of patches.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists