From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org" <linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: fix clear NOHZ_BALANCE_KICK
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 13:19:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130604111900.GB14973@somewhere> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKfTPtCLYnhQH3Mcx5dhRi9+9_679fdrhm8iZBSpgyu8VmevYw@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 01:11:47PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On 4 June 2013 12:26, Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 11:36:11AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >>
> >> The best I can seem to come up with is something like the below; but I think
> >> its ghastly. Surely we can do something saner with that bit.
> >>
> >> Having to clear it at 3 different places is just wrong.
> >
> > We could clear the flag early in scheduler_ipi() and set some
> > specific value in rq->idle_balance that tells we want nohz idle
> > balancing from the softirq, something like this untested:
>
> I'm not sure that we can have less than 2 places to clear it: cancel
> place or acknowledge place otherwise we can face a situation where
> idle load balance will be triggered 2 consecutive times because
> NOHZ_BALANCE_KICK will be cleared before the idle load balance has
> been done and had a chance to migrate tasks.
I guess it depends what is the minimum value of rq->next_balance, it seems
to be large enough to avoid this kind of incident. Although I don't
know well the whole logic with rq->next_balance and ilb trigger so I must
defer to you.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-04 11:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-30 15:23 [PATCH] sched: fix clear NOHZ_BALANCE_KICK Vincent Guittot
2013-06-03 22:48 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-06-04 8:21 ` Vincent Guittot
2013-06-04 9:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-06-04 10:26 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-06-04 11:11 ` Vincent Guittot
2013-06-04 11:19 ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2013-06-04 11:48 ` Vincent Guittot
2013-06-04 14:44 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-06-04 15:29 ` Vincent Guittot
2013-06-05 13:31 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-06-04 11:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-06-04 11:53 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-06-04 9:56 ` Frederic Weisbecker
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=20130604111900.GB14973@somewhere \
--to=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
/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.