From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Morten Rasmussen Subject: Re: [RFCv5 PATCH 11/46] sched: Remove blocked load and utilization contributions of dying tasks Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 10:08:08 +0100 Message-ID: <20150812090807.GA29326@e105550-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <1436293469-25707-1-git-send-email-morten.rasmussen@arm.com> <1436293469-25707-12-git-send-email-morten.rasmussen@arm.com> <20150811113927.GT19282@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20150811145847.GA20892@e105550-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20150811172344.GO16853@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150811172344.GO16853@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: mingo@redhat.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, daniel.lezcano@linaro.org, Dietmar Eggemann , yuyang.du@intel.com, mturquette@baylibre.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net, Juri Lelli , sgurrappadi@nvidia.com, pang.xunlei@zte.com.cn, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 07:23:44PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 03:58:48PM +0100, Morten Rasmussen wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 01:39:27PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > You add extra code the hot dequeue path for something that 'never' > > > happens. We have the sched_class::task_dead call for that. > > > > I don't mind using sched_class::task_dead() instead. The reason why I > > didn't go that way is that we have to retake the rq->lock or mess with > > cfs_rq::removed_load instead of just not adding the utilization in > > the first place when we have the rq->lock. > > > > Anyway, it is probably redundant by now. I will check Yuyang's code to > > see if he already fixed this problem. > > He did, he used the removed_load stuff, same as migration does. Nice. One less patch to worry about :)