Re: v2.6.21.4-rt11

[Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 08:46:03PM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> @@ -2493,17 +2493,18 @@ static void idle_balance(int this_cpu, s
>  	unsigned long next_balance = jiffies + 60 *  HZ;
> 
>  	for_each_domain(this_cpu, sd) {
> -		if (sd->flags & SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE) {
> +		unsigned long interval;
> +

Do we need a :

		if (!(sd->flags & SD_LOAD_BALANCE))
			continue;

here?

Otherwise patch look good and fixes the problem Paul observed earlier.

> +		if (sd->flags & SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE)
>  			/* If we've pulled tasks over stop searching: */
> -			pulled_task = load_balance_newidle(this_cpu,
> -							this_rq, sd);
> -			if (time_after(next_balance,
> -				  sd->last_balance + sd->balance_interval))
> -				next_balance = sd->last_balance
> -						+ sd->balance_interval;
> -			if (pulled_task)
> -				break;
> -		}
> +			pulled_task = load_balance_newidle(this_cpu,this_rq, sd);
> +
> +		interval = msecs_to_jiffies(sd->balance_interval);


> +		if (time_after(next_balance,
> +			  sd->last_balance + interval))
> +			next_balance = sd->last_balance + interval;
> +		if (pulled_task)
> +			break;
>  	}
>  	if (!pulled_task)
>  		/*

-- 
Regards,
vatsa