From: "Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@nortel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@in.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] sched: fix wakeup preemption
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 15:57:21 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48FCFEC1.9000800@nortel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081017172829.768067427@chello.nl>
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> In my recent wakeup preempt rework I messed up the asym wakeup.
> The idea is that it should be easier to preempt lighter tasks
> but not harder to preempt heavier tasks.
> Index: linux-2.6/kernel/sched_fair.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/sched_fair.c
> +++ linux-2.6/kernel/sched_fair.c
> @@ -1243,8 +1243,8 @@ static unsigned long wakeup_gran(struct
> * More easily preempt - nice tasks, while not making it harder for
> * + nice tasks.
> */
> - if (sched_feat(ASYM_GRAN))
> - gran = calc_delta_mine(gran, NICE_0_LOAD, &se->load);
> + if (sched_feat(ASYM_GRAN) && se->load.weight < NICE_0_LOAD)
> + gran = (gran * se->load.weight) >> NICE_0_SHIFT;
>
> return gran;
> }
Setting aside whether the asym wakeup is desirable, the code looks
reasonable but I think you need to change the code comments as well.
The proposed code only affects with a weight of less than NICE_0_LOAD,
ie. +nice tasks. The comment suggests the opposite.
Chris
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-10-20 21:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-17 17:27 [PATCH 0/4] pending scheduler updates Peter Zijlstra
2008-10-17 17:27 ` [PATCH 1/4] sched: optimize group load balancer Peter Zijlstra
2008-10-17 17:27 ` [PATCH 2/4] sched: fair scheduler should not resched rt tasks Peter Zijlstra
2008-10-17 17:27 ` [PATCH 3/4] sched: revert back to per-rq vruntime Peter Zijlstra
2008-10-17 17:27 ` [PATCH 4/4] sched: fix wakeup preemption Peter Zijlstra
2008-10-20 21:57 ` Chris Friesen [this message]
2008-10-20 12:05 ` [PATCH 0/4] pending scheduler updates Ingo Molnar
2008-10-21 17:35 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2008-10-22 9:40 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-22 10:03 ` Mike Galbraith
2008-10-22 10:32 ` Mike Galbraith
2008-10-22 12:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-22 12:38 ` Mike Galbraith
2008-10-22 12:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-22 13:05 ` Mike Galbraith
2008-10-22 17:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-10-22 17:56 ` Mike Galbraith
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=48FCFEC1.9000800@nortel.com \
--to=cfriesen@nortel.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=vatsa@in.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.