[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAB8ipk9V-opeFk34cc6zOV+RyMn7OKFocbWwnE-W3L=dCunw+Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2025 14:33:26 +0800
From: Xuewen Yan <xuewen.yan94@...il.com>
To: Hongyan Xia <hongyan.xia2@....com>
Cc: Xuewen Yan <xuewen.yan@...soc.com>, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org,
juri.lelli@...hat.com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com,
mgorman@...e.de, vschneid@...hat.co, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
qyousef@...alina.io, ke.wang@...soc.com, di.shen@...soc.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] sched/util_est: Do not sub the delayed-task's util-est
Hi Hongyan
On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 9:14 PM Hongyan Xia <hongyan.xia2@....com> wrote:
> Have you tested the above changes to make sure util_est enqueue dequeue
> are balanced? util_est was broken for quite a while when merging delayed
> dequeue because now enqueue_ and dequeue_task() do not always appear in
> pairs. Since then, I always have a local patch like this (may be a bit
> out of date now) to make sure util_est is balanced
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/752ae417c02b9277ca3ec18893747c54dd5f277f.1724245193.git.hongyan.xia2@arm.com/
I use your patch and test the patch in kernel-6.12, I haven't seen any
corresponding alarm information yet.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists