lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [May]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RESEND PATCH V5 0/8] remove cpu_load idx
On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 03:24:13PM +0530, Preeti Murthy wrote:
> Hi Morten, Peter, Alex,
>
> In a similar context, I noticed that /proc/loadavg makes use of
> avenrun[] array which keeps track of the history of the global
> load average. This however makes use of the sum of
> nr_running + nr_uninterruptible per cpu. Why are we not
> using the cpu_load[] array here which also keeps track
> of the history of per-cpu load and then return a sum of it?

Entirely different kind of 'load'. Note that you cannot use
->nr_uninterruptible per-cpu, also note that sched/proc.c doesn't.

> Using nr_running to show the global load average would
> be misleading when entire load balancing is being done on the
> basis of the history of cfs_rq->runnable_load_avg/cpu_load[]
> right? IOW, to the best of my understanding we do not use
> nr_running anywhere to directly determine cpu load in the kernel.
>
> My idea was that the global/per_cpu load that we reflect via
> proc/sys interfaces must be consistent. I haven't really
> looked at what /proc/schedstat, /proc/stat, top are all reading
> from. But /proc/loadavg is reading out global nr_running +
> waiting tasks when this will not give us the accurate picture
> of the system load especially when there are many short running
> tasks.

Nobody said /proc/loadavg is a sane number, but its what it is and since
its a global number its entirely unsuited for balancing -- not to
mention all other reasons its crap.

[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-05-06 14:21    [W:0.067 / U:1.344 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site