From: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org,
peterz@infradead.org, vincent.guittot@linaro.org,
tglx@linutronix.de, qais.yousef@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] sched/fair: Move active balance logic to its own function
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2019 17:06:47 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191001111601.GA32306@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190815145107.5318-3-valentin.schneider@arm.com>
> +unlock:
> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&busiest->lock, flags);
> +
> + if (status == started)
> + stop_one_cpu_nowait(cpu_of(busiest),
> + active_load_balance_cpu_stop, busiest,
> + &busiest->active_balance_work);
> +
> + /* We've kicked active balancing, force task migration. */
> + if (status != cancelled_affinity)
> + sd->nr_balance_failed = sd->cache_nice_tries + 1;
Should we really update nr_balance_failed if status is cancelled?
I do understand this behaviour was present even before this change. But
still dont understand why we need to update if the current operation didn't
kick active_load_balance.
--
Thanks and Regards
Srikar Dronamraju
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-01 11:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-15 14:51 [PATCH v2 0/4] sched/fair: Active balancer RT/DL preemption fix Valentin Schneider
2019-08-15 14:51 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] sched/fair: Make need_active_balance() return bools Valentin Schneider
2019-08-15 14:51 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] sched/fair: Move active balance logic to its own function Valentin Schneider
2019-10-01 11:36 ` Srikar Dronamraju [this message]
2019-10-01 11:48 ` Valentin Schneider
2019-08-15 14:51 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] sched/fair: Check for CFS tasks before detach_one_task() Valentin Schneider
2019-08-15 14:51 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] sched/fair: Prevent active LB from preempting higher sched classes Valentin Schneider
2019-08-27 12:28 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-08-28 9:46 ` Valentin Schneider
2019-08-29 14:19 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-08-30 15:44 ` Valentin Schneider
2019-10-01 10:29 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] sched/fair: Active balancer RT/DL preemption fix Valentin Schneider
2019-10-01 13:31 ` Juri Lelli
2019-10-01 14:15 ` Valentin Schneider
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=20191001111601.GA32306@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=qais.yousef@arm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).