lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Mar]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [patch] Re: scheduler oddity [bug?]
From
Date
On Mon, 2009-03-09 at 14:27 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-03-09 at 14:16 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Mon, 2009-03-09 at 12:04 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > > OK, talked a bit with Ingo, the reason you're doing is that avg_overlap
> > > can easily grow stale.. I can see that happen indeed.
> > >
> > > So the 'perfect' thing would be a task-runtime decay, barring that the
> > > preemption thing seems a sane enough hart-beat of a task.
> > >
> > > How does the below look to you?
> >
> > Other than the fact that the test for sync reject is currently
> > avg_overlap > sysctl_sched_migration_cost, looks fine to me. Having it
> > capped at the boundary is probably the better way to go.
>
> Ah, yes, and looking at update_avg() we'll also discard the lower 3
> bits, so we'll never actually reach.
>
> So I guess it should read something like:
>
> update_avg(&prev->se.avg_overlap, 2*sysctl_sched_migration_cost);
>
> or somesuch.
>
> Does it actually solve the reported problem? I've only thought about the
> issue so far :-)

5977 root 20 0 3672 440 352 R 100 0.0 0:28.53 2 pipetest
5978 root 20 0 3668 180 96 S 29 0.0 0:08.27 0 pipetest

Yup, works for me. Ship it :)

-Mike



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-03-09 14:53    [W:0.073 / U:2.980 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site