From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org" <linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: fix clear NOHZ_BALANCE_KICK
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 13:19:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130604111900.GB14973@somewhere> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKfTPtCLYnhQH3Mcx5dhRi9+9_679fdrhm8iZBSpgyu8VmevYw@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 01:11:47PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On 4 June 2013 12:26, Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 11:36:11AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >>
> >> The best I can seem to come up with is something like the below; but I think
> >> its ghastly. Surely we can do something saner with that bit.
> >>
> >> Having to clear it at 3 different places is just wrong.
> >
> > We could clear the flag early in scheduler_ipi() and set some
> > specific value in rq->idle_balance that tells we want nohz idle
> > balancing from the softirq, something like this untested:
>
> I'm not sure that we can have less than 2 places to clear it: cancel
> place or acknowledge place otherwise we can face a situation where
> idle load balance will be triggered 2 consecutive times because
> NOHZ_BALANCE_KICK will be cleared before the idle load balance has
> been done and had a chance to migrate tasks.
I guess it depends what is the minimum value of rq->next_balance, it seems
to be large enough to avoid this kind of incident. Although I don't
know well the whole logic with rq->next_balance and ilb trigger so I must
defer to you.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-04 11:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-30 15:23 [PATCH] sched: fix clear NOHZ_BALANCE_KICK Vincent Guittot
2013-06-03 22:48 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-06-04 8:21 ` Vincent Guittot
2013-06-04 9:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-06-04 10:26 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-06-04 11:11 ` Vincent Guittot
2013-06-04 11:19 ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2013-06-04 11:48 ` Vincent Guittot
2013-06-04 14:44 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-06-04 15:29 ` Vincent Guittot
2013-06-05 13:31 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-06-04 11:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-06-04 11:53 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-06-04 9:56 ` Frederic Weisbecker
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=20130604111900.GB14973@somewhere \
--to=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
/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