From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Li Zhong <zhong@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>,
Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>, Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/4] sched: Consolidate nohz cpu load prelude code
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 14:01:07 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130620210107.GM4082@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1371761141-25386-3-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com>
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 10:45:39PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> Gather the common code that computes the pending idle cpu load
> to decay.
>
> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> Cc: Li Zhong <zhong@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
> Cc: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
> Cc: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>
> Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
> Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
> ---
> kernel/sched/proc.c | 40 ++++++++++++++--------------------------
> 1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/proc.c b/kernel/sched/proc.c
> index bb3a6a0..030528a 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/proc.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/proc.c
> @@ -470,11 +470,14 @@ decay_load_missed(unsigned long load, unsigned long missed_updates, int idx)
> * scheduler tick (TICK_NSEC). With tickless idle this will not be called
> * every tick. We fix it up based on jiffies.
> */
> -static void __update_cpu_load(struct rq *this_rq, unsigned long this_load,
> - unsigned long pending_updates)
> +static void __update_cpu_load(struct rq *this_rq, unsigned long this_load)
> {
> + unsigned long curr_jiffies = ACCESS_ONCE(jiffies);
Isn't jiffies declared volatile? (Looks that way to me.) If so, there
is no need for ACCESS_ONCE().
> + unsigned long pending_updates;
> int i, scale;
>
> + pending_updates = curr_jiffies - this_rq->last_load_update_tick;
> + this_rq->last_load_update_tick = curr_jiffies;
> this_rq->nr_load_updates++;
>
> /* Update our load: */
> @@ -521,20 +524,15 @@ static void __update_cpu_load(struct rq *this_rq, unsigned long this_load,
> */
> void update_idle_cpu_load(struct rq *this_rq)
> {
> - unsigned long curr_jiffies = ACCESS_ONCE(jiffies);
> unsigned long load = this_rq->load.weight;
> - unsigned long pending_updates;
>
> /*
> * bail if there's load or we're actually up-to-date.
> */
> - if (load || curr_jiffies == this_rq->last_load_update_tick)
> + if (load || jiffies == this_rq->last_load_update_tick)
> return;
>
> - pending_updates = curr_jiffies - this_rq->last_load_update_tick;
> - this_rq->last_load_update_tick = curr_jiffies;
> -
> - __update_cpu_load(this_rq, load, pending_updates);
> + __update_cpu_load(this_rq, load);
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -543,22 +541,16 @@ void update_idle_cpu_load(struct rq *this_rq)
> void update_cpu_load_nohz(void)
> {
> struct rq *this_rq = this_rq();
> - unsigned long curr_jiffies = ACCESS_ONCE(jiffies);
> - unsigned long pending_updates;
>
> - if (curr_jiffies == this_rq->last_load_update_tick)
> + if (jiffies == this_rq->last_load_update_tick)
> return;
>
> raw_spin_lock(&this_rq->lock);
> - pending_updates = curr_jiffies - this_rq->last_load_update_tick;
> - if (pending_updates) {
> - this_rq->last_load_update_tick = curr_jiffies;
> - /*
> - * We were idle, this means load 0, the current load might be
> - * !0 due to remote wakeups and the sort.
> - */
> - __update_cpu_load(this_rq, 0, pending_updates);
> - }
> + /*
> + * We were idle, this means load 0, the current load might be
> + * !0 due to remote wakeups and the sort.
> + */
> + __update_cpu_load(this_rq, 0);
> raw_spin_unlock(&this_rq->lock);
> }
> #endif /* CONFIG_NO_HZ */
> @@ -568,11 +560,7 @@ void update_cpu_load_nohz(void)
> */
> void update_cpu_load_active(struct rq *this_rq)
> {
> - /*
> - * See the mess around update_idle_cpu_load() / update_cpu_load_nohz().
> - */
> - this_rq->last_load_update_tick = jiffies;
> - __update_cpu_load(this_rq, this_rq->load.weight, 1);
> + __update_cpu_load(this_rq, this_rq->load.weight);
>
> calc_load_account_active(this_rq);
> }
> --
> 1.7.5.4
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-20 21:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-20 20:45 [RFC PATCH 0/4] sched: Disabled LB_BIAS with full dynticks Frederic Weisbecker
2013-06-20 20:45 ` [RFC PATCH 1/4] sched: Disable lb_bias feature for " Frederic Weisbecker
2013-06-20 21:01 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-06-20 20:45 ` [RFC PATCH 2/4] sched: Consolidate nohz cpu load prelude code Frederic Weisbecker
2013-06-20 21:01 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2013-06-20 20:45 ` [RFC PATCH 3/4] sched: Conditionally build decaying cpu load stats Frederic Weisbecker
2013-06-20 20:45 ` [RFC PATCH 4/4] sched: Consolidate open coded preemptible() checks Frederic Weisbecker
2013-06-26 13:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-07-01 11:20 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-07-01 11:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=20130620210107.GM4082@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=alex.shi@intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=zhong@linux.vnet.ibm.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.