From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932999AbbGGSXw (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jul 2015 14:23:52 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:37425 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932785AbbGGSWc (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jul 2015 14:22:32 -0400 From: Morten Rasmussen To: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com Cc: vincent.guittot@linaro.org, daniel.lezcano@linaro.org, Dietmar Eggemann , yuyang.du@intel.com, mturquette@baylibre.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net, Juri Lelli , sgurrappadi@nvidia.com, pang.xunlei@zte.com.cn, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org Subject: [RFCv5 PATCH 12/46] sched: Initialize CFS task load and usage before placing task on rq Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2015 19:23:55 +0100 Message-Id: <1436293469-25707-13-git-send-email-morten.rasmussen@arm.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.9.1 In-Reply-To: <1436293469-25707-1-git-send-email-morten.rasmussen@arm.com> References: <1436293469-25707-1-git-send-email-morten.rasmussen@arm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Task load or usage is not currently considered in select_task_rq_fair(), but if we want that in the future we should make sure it is not zero for new tasks. The load-tracking sums are currently initialized using sched_slice(), that won't work before the task has been assigned a rq. Initialization is therefore changed to another semi-arbitrary value, sched_latency, instead. cc: Ingo Molnar cc: Peter Zijlstra Signed-off-by: Morten Rasmussen --- kernel/sched/core.c | 4 ++-- kernel/sched/fair.c | 7 +++---- 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c index 10338ce..6a06fe5 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/core.c +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c @@ -2126,6 +2126,8 @@ void wake_up_new_task(struct task_struct *p) struct rq *rq; raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&p->pi_lock, flags); + /* Initialize new task's runnable average */ + init_task_runnable_average(p); #ifdef CONFIG_SMP /* * Fork balancing, do it here and not earlier because: @@ -2135,8 +2137,6 @@ void wake_up_new_task(struct task_struct *p) set_task_cpu(p, select_task_rq(p, task_cpu(p), SD_BALANCE_FORK, 0)); #endif - /* Initialize new task's runnable average */ - init_task_runnable_average(p); rq = __task_rq_lock(p); activate_task(rq, p, 0); p->on_rq = TASK_ON_RQ_QUEUED; diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c index fa12ce5..d0df937 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c @@ -675,11 +675,10 @@ static inline void __update_task_entity_utilization(struct sched_entity *se); /* Give new task start runnable values to heavy its load in infant time */ void init_task_runnable_average(struct task_struct *p) { - u32 slice; + u32 start_load = sysctl_sched_latency >> 10; - slice = sched_slice(task_cfs_rq(p), &p->se) >> 10; - p->se.avg.runnable_avg_sum = p->se.avg.running_avg_sum = slice; - p->se.avg.avg_period = slice; + p->se.avg.runnable_avg_sum = p->se.avg.running_avg_sum = start_load; + p->se.avg.avg_period = start_load; __update_task_entity_contrib(&p->se); __update_task_entity_utilization(&p->se); } -- 1.9.1