From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752637AbdBINiC (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Feb 2017 08:38:02 -0500 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([65.50.211.133]:36182 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752274AbdBINh7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Feb 2017 08:37:59 -0500 Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 13:20:05 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Uladzislau Rezki Cc: Ingo Molnar , LKML , Uladzislau 2 Rezki Subject: Re: [RFC,v2 2/3] sched: set number of iterations to h_nr_running Message-ID: <20170209122005.GD6500@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <1486543409-11493-1-git-send-email-urezki@gmail.com> <1486543409-11493-2-git-send-email-urezki@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1486543409-11493-2-git-send-email-urezki@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23.1 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 09:43:28AM +0100, Uladzislau Rezki wrote: > From: Uladzislau 2 Rezki > > It is possible that busiest run queue has multiple RT tasks, > whereas no CFS tasks, that is why it is reasonable to use > h_nr_running instead, because a load balance only applies > for CFS related tasks. Sure, I suppose that makes sense, but then it would make even more sense to do a more thorough audit of the code and make sure all remaining rq::nr_running uses are correct.