[PATCH v7 6/7] sched: replace capacity_factor by usage

[kernellwp@gmail.com (Wanpeng Li)]

Hi Vincent,
On 10/9/14, 10:18 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On 9 October 2014 14:16, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 02:13:36PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>>> +static inline bool
>>> +group_has_capacity(struct lb_env *env, struct sg_lb_stats *sgs)
>>>   {
>>> +     if ((sgs->group_capacity * 100) >
>>> +                     (sgs->group_usage * env->sd->imbalance_pct))
>>> +             return true;
>> Why the imb_pct there? We're looking for 100% utilization, not 130 or
>> whatnot, right?
> Having exactly 100% is quite difficult because of various rounding.

Could you give some examples about the various rounding?

Regards,
Wanpeng Li

> So i have added a margin/threshold to prevent any excessive change of the state.
> I have just to use the same margin/threshold than in other place in
> load balance.
>
> so the current threshold depends of the sched_level. it's around 14% at MC level
>
>>> +     if (sgs->sum_nr_running < sgs->group_weight)
>>> +             return true;
>> With the code as it stands, this is the cheaper test (no mults) so why
>> is it second?
>>
>>> +     return false;
>>> +}
>>>
>>> +static inline bool
>>> +group_is_overloaded(struct lb_env *env, struct sg_lb_stats *sgs)
>>> +{
>>> +     if (sgs->sum_nr_running <= sgs->group_weight)
>>> +             return false;
>>> +
>>> +     if ((sgs->group_capacity * 100) <
>>> +                     (sgs->group_usage * env->sd->imbalance_pct))
>>> +             return true;
>>>
>>> +     return false;
>>>   }
>> Same thing here wrt imb_pct
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/