lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Nov]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Fix find busiest queue 2.6.0-test9
On the same vein ... this looks odd:

* We fend off statistical fluctuations in runqueue lengths by
* saving the runqueue length during the previous load-balancing
* operation and using the smaller one the current and saved lengths.
* If a runqueue is long enough for a longer amount of time then
* we recognize it and pull tasks from it.
...
if (idle || (this_rq->nr_running > this_rq->prev_cpu_load[this_cpu]))
nr_running = this_rq->nr_running;
else
nr_running = this_rq->prev_cpu_load[this_cpu];

It says we uses the smaller of the two in the comment, but then it seems to
use the > of the two in the code? Unless I'm losing it, which is likely ;-)

Later, we do "*imbalance = (max_load - nr_running) / 2;" ... to "fend off
statistical fluctuations", we want to reduce imbalance, which would mean
a larger nr_running .... so to my mind, it's the comment that's wrong?

M.


-
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: 2005-03-22 13:58    [W:0.038 / U:0.132 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site