From: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
To: Rabin Vincent <rabin.vincent@axis.com>
Cc: "mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH?] Livelock in pick_next_task_fair() / idle_balance()
Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2015 17:47:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1435765657.2863.14.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150701145551.GA15690@axis.com>
On Wed, 2015-07-01 at 16:55 +0200, Rabin Vincent wrote:
> So, we will not hit the "if (env->src_rq->load.weight <=
> env->dst_rq->load.weight + d_load)" condition to break out of the loop until we
> actualy move all tasks. So the patch will not have any effect on this case.
> Or am I missing something?
Probably not. I did have it breaking if dst_rq would pass
src_rq->nr_running, which would certainly stop it, but thought I try to
let it watch weights.
Either way, task_h_load(p) returning 0 is not very wonderful.
-Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-01 15:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-30 14:30 [PATCH?] Livelock in pick_next_task_fair() / idle_balance() Rabin Vincent
2015-07-01 5:36 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-07-01 14:55 ` Rabin Vincent
2015-07-01 15:47 ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2015-07-01 20:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-01 23:25 ` Yuyang Du
2015-07-02 8:05 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-07-02 1:05 ` Yuyang Du
2015-07-02 10:25 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-07-02 11:40 ` Morten Rasmussen
2015-07-02 19:37 ` Yuyang Du
2015-07-03 9:34 ` Morten Rasmussen
2015-07-03 16:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-05 22:31 ` Yuyang Du
2015-07-09 14:32 ` Morten Rasmussen
2015-07-09 23:24 ` Yuyang Du
2015-07-05 20:12 ` Yuyang Du
2015-07-06 17:36 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2015-07-07 11:17 ` Rabin Vincent
2015-07-13 17:43 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2015-07-09 13:53 ` Morten Rasmussen
2015-07-09 22:34 ` Yuyang Du
2015-07-02 10:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-02 11:44 ` Morten Rasmussen
2015-07-02 18:42 ` Yuyang Du
2015-07-03 4:42 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-07-03 16:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-05 22:11 ` Yuyang Du
2015-07-09 6:15 ` Stefan Ekenberg
2015-07-26 18:57 ` Yuyang Du
2015-08-03 17:05 ` [tip:sched/core] sched/fair: Avoid pulling all tasks in idle balancing tip-bot for Yuyang Du
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1435765657.2863.14.camel@gmail.com \
--to=umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rabin.vincent@axis.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.