public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@nortel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@in.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] sched: fix wakeup preemption
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 15:57:21 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <48FCFEC1.9000800@nortel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081017172829.768067427@chello.nl>

Peter Zijlstra wrote:

 > In my recent wakeup preempt rework I messed up the asym wakeup.
 > The idea is that it should be easier to preempt lighter tasks
 > but not harder to preempt heavier tasks.

 > Index: linux-2.6/kernel/sched_fair.c
 > ===================================================================
 > --- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/sched_fair.c
 > +++ linux-2.6/kernel/sched_fair.c
 > @@ -1243,8 +1243,8 @@ static unsigned long wakeup_gran(struct
 >   	 * More easily preempt - nice tasks, while not making it harder for
 >   	 * + nice tasks.
 >   	 */
 > -	if (sched_feat(ASYM_GRAN))
 > -		gran = calc_delta_mine(gran, NICE_0_LOAD, &se->load);
 > +	if (sched_feat(ASYM_GRAN) && se->load.weight < NICE_0_LOAD)
 > +		gran = (gran * se->load.weight) >> NICE_0_SHIFT;
 >
 >   	return gran;
 >   }

Setting aside whether the asym wakeup is desirable, the code looks 
reasonable but I think you need to change the code comments as well.

The proposed code only affects with a weight of less than NICE_0_LOAD, 
ie. +nice tasks.  The comment suggests the opposite.

Chris

  reply	other threads:[~2008-10-20 21:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-10-17 17:27 [PATCH 0/4] pending scheduler updates Peter Zijlstra
2008-10-17 17:27 ` [PATCH 1/4] sched: optimize group load balancer Peter Zijlstra
2008-10-17 17:27 ` [PATCH 2/4] sched: fair scheduler should not resched rt tasks Peter Zijlstra
2008-10-17 17:27 ` [PATCH 3/4] sched: revert back to per-rq vruntime Peter Zijlstra
2008-10-17 17:27 ` [PATCH 4/4] sched: fix wakeup preemption Peter Zijlstra
2008-10-20 21:57   ` Chris Friesen [this message]
2008-10-20 12:05 ` [PATCH 0/4] pending scheduler updates Ingo Molnar
2008-10-21 17:35   ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2008-10-22  9:40     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-22 10:03       ` Mike Galbraith
2008-10-22 10:32         ` Mike Galbraith
2008-10-22 12:10           ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-22 12:38             ` Mike Galbraith
2008-10-22 12:42               ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-22 13:05                 ` Mike Galbraith
2008-10-22 17:38           ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-10-22 17:56             ` Mike Galbraith

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=48FCFEC1.9000800@nortel.com \
    --to=cfriesen@nortel.com \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=efault@gmx.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=vatsa@in.ibm.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