lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Aug]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] sched: make update_cpu_load_active care more than one tick
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 06:35:24PM +0900, byungchul.park@lge.com wrote:
> From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
>
> i found do_timer accounts other than one tick, so i made
> update_cpu_load_active care that.
>
> is it intended because of its overhead?

hello,

is there anyone who can tell me any opinion about this concern?

>
> Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
> ---
> kernel/sched/fair.c | 7 +++++--
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index ffa70dc..cd3d98f 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -4506,12 +4506,15 @@ void update_cpu_load_nohz(void)
> */
> void update_cpu_load_active(struct rq *this_rq)
> {
> + unsigned long curr_jiffies = READ_ONCE(jiffies);
> + unsigned long pending_updates;
> unsigned long load = this_rq->cfs.runnable_load_avg;
> /*
> * See the mess around update_idle_cpu_load() / update_cpu_load_nohz().
> */
> - this_rq->last_load_update_tick = jiffies;
> - __update_cpu_load(this_rq, load, 1);
> + pending_updates = curr_jiffies - this_rq->last_load_update_tick;
> + this_rq->last_load_update_tick = curr_jiffies;
> + __update_cpu_load(this_rq, load, pending_updates);
> }
>
> /* Used instead of source_load when we know the type == 0 */
> --
> 1.7.9.5
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-08-18 02:01    [W:0.088 / U:0.916 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site