From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751601AbcFUNEL (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:04:11 -0400 Received: from mail-lf0-f44.google.com ([209.85.215.44]:35059 "EHLO mail-lf0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751084AbcFUNEJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:04:09 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160621124740.GN30921@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20160617120136.064100812@infradead.org> <20160617120454.150630859@infradead.org> <20160617142814.GT30154@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20160617160239.GL30927@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20160617161831.GM30927@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20160620092339.GA4526@vingu-laptop> <20160621114335.GQ30909@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20160621124740.GN30921@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> From: Vincent Guittot Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 14:56:09 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] sched,fair: Fix PELT integrity for new tasks To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Yuyang Du , Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel , Mike Galbraith , Benjamin Segall , Paul Turner , Morten Rasmussen , Dietmar Eggemann , Matt Fleming Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 21 June 2016 at 14:47, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 02:36:46PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote: >> On 21 June 2016 at 13:43, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> > On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 11:23:39AM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote: >> > >> >> Don't we have to do a complete attach with attach_task_cfs_rq instead >> >> of just the load_avg ? to set also depth ? >> > >> > Hmm, yes, your sched_set_group() change seems to have munged this. >> > >> >> I think that it was done by the attach_task_cfs_rq during the activate_task. >> Now, the attach is done in post_init_entity_util_avg. Can't we just >> set the depth in post_init_entity_util_avg ? > > Yes, I actually had that patch for a little while. > > But since its cgroup specific, I felt it should be in the cgroup code, > hence the current patch. that's a fair point