lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Apr]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] nohz_full: Make sched_should_stop_tick() more conservative
From
Date
On 4/21/2016 12:03 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 04:42:13PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
>> So I think that is indeed the right thing here. But looking at this
>> function I think there's more problems with it.
>>
>> It seems to assume that if there's FIFO tasks, those will run. This is
>> incorrect. The FIFO task can have a lower prio than an RR task, in which
>> case the RR task will run.
>>
>> So the whole fifo_nr_running test seems misplaced, it should go after
>> the rr_nr_running tests. That is, only if !rr_nr_running, can we use
>> fifo_nr_running like this.
> A little something like so perhaps; can anybody test?

Tested-by: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@mellanox.com>

To be clear, I only tested that it fixed my original bug, where we weren't
kicking a remote cpu when we should have been; I have not tested that
it works properly in the presence of RR or FIFO scheduled tasks.

But this or something like it should definitely go into 4.6 before it's done.

--
Chris Metcalf, Mellanox Technologies
http://www.mellanox.com

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-04-26 00:01    [W:1.093 / U:0.160 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site