[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c72802d4-7155-4c51-9d55-0372e8c4b6cb@amd.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2025 20:57:32 +0530
From: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@....com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>, Steven Rostedt
<rostedt@...dmis.org>, Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman
<mgorman@...e.de>, Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>, "Gautham R.
Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@....com>, Swapnil Sapkal <swapnil.sapkal@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] sched/fair: Rework inter-NUMA newidle balancing
On 4/10/2025 3:44 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
[..snip..]
>> + continue;
>> +
>> + scoped_guard (rq_lock, overloaded_rq) {
>> + update_rq_clock(overloaded_rq);
>> +
>> + if (!has_pushable_tasks(overloaded_rq))
>> + break;
>
> You can skip the clock update if there aren't any tasks to grab.
Ack.
>
>> +
>> + env.src_cpu = overloaded_cpu;
>> + env.src_rq = overloaded_rq;
>> +
>> + p = detach_one_task(&env);
>
> Yep, detach_one_task() uses can_migrate_task() which checks
> task_on_cpu(), so that's all good :-)
>
>> + }
>> +
>> + if (!p)
>> + continue;
>> +
>> + attach_one_task(this_rq, p);
>> + return 1;
>> + }
>> +
>> + cpumask_andnot(cpus, cpus, sched_domain_span(cpu_llc));
>> + }
--
Thanks and Regards,
Prateek
Powered by blists - more mailing lists