Messages in this thread | | | From | "Doug Smythies" <> | Subject | RE: [PATCH] sched: Folding nohz load accounting more accurate | Date | Tue, 19 Jun 2012 08:50:29 -0700 |
| |
>> On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 14:08 +0800, Yong Zhang wrote: > On 2012.06.19 02:19 -0700, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> /* >>> + * If we're still outside the sample window, we're done. >>> */ >>> + if (time_before(jiffies, this_rq->calc_load_update)) >>> + return;
>> else if (time_before(jiffies, calc_load_update + 10) >> this_rq->calc_load_update = calc_load_update + LOAD_FREQ; >> else >> this_rq->calc_load_update = calc_load_update; >> >> Otherwise if you woke after the sample window, we loose on sample? >> And maybe we need local variable to cache calc_load_update.
> Ah indeed, although I'd write it like:
> this_rq->calc_load_update = calc_load_update; > if (time_before(jiffies, this_rq->calc_load_update + 10) > this_rq->calc_load_update += LOAD_FREQ;
Note missing end brace: if (time_before(jiffies, this_rq->calc_load_update + 10))
My automated 63 hour test has been terminated, the code changed and the test re-started.
The attached png file is what I had so far, but it will be replaced. Summary: Looked good, so far.
[unhandled content-type:image/png] | |