From: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
To: Rabin Vincent <rabin.vincent@axis.com>
Cc: "mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH?] Livelock in pick_next_task_fair() / idle_balance()
Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2015 17:47:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1435765657.2863.14.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150701145551.GA15690@axis.com>
On Wed, 2015-07-01 at 16:55 +0200, Rabin Vincent wrote:
> So, we will not hit the "if (env->src_rq->load.weight <=
> env->dst_rq->load.weight + d_load)" condition to break out of the loop until we
> actualy move all tasks. So the patch will not have any effect on this case.
> Or am I missing something?
Probably not. I did have it breaking if dst_rq would pass
src_rq->nr_running, which would certainly stop it, but thought I try to
let it watch weights.
Either way, task_h_load(p) returning 0 is not very wonderful.
-Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-01 15:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-30 14:30 [PATCH?] Livelock in pick_next_task_fair() / idle_balance() Rabin Vincent
2015-07-01 5:36 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-07-01 14:55 ` Rabin Vincent
2015-07-01 15:47 ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2015-07-01 20:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-01 23:25 ` Yuyang Du
2015-07-02 8:05 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-07-02 1:05 ` Yuyang Du
2015-07-02 10:25 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-07-02 11:40 ` Morten Rasmussen
2015-07-02 19:37 ` Yuyang Du
2015-07-03 9:34 ` Morten Rasmussen
2015-07-03 16:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-05 22:31 ` Yuyang Du
2015-07-09 14:32 ` Morten Rasmussen
2015-07-09 23:24 ` Yuyang Du
2015-07-05 20:12 ` Yuyang Du
2015-07-06 17:36 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2015-07-07 11:17 ` Rabin Vincent
2015-07-13 17:43 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2015-07-09 13:53 ` Morten Rasmussen
2015-07-09 22:34 ` Yuyang Du
2015-07-02 10:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-02 11:44 ` Morten Rasmussen
2015-07-02 18:42 ` Yuyang Du
2015-07-03 4:42 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-07-03 16:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-05 22:11 ` Yuyang Du
2015-07-09 6:15 ` Stefan Ekenberg
2015-07-26 18:57 ` Yuyang Du
2015-08-03 17:05 ` [tip:sched/core] sched/fair: Avoid pulling all tasks in idle balancing tip-bot for Yuyang Du
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=1435765657.2863.14.camel@gmail.com \
--to=umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rabin.vincent@axis.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox