lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Jul]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v10 6/7] sched: Provide runnable_load_avg back to cfs_rq
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 09:08:07AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> Hi Yuyang,
>
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 08:04:41AM +0800, Yuyang Du wrote:
> > The cfs_rq's load_avg is composed of runnable_load_avg and blocked_load_avg.
> > Before this series, sometimes the runnable_load_avg is used, and sometimes
> > the load_avg is used. Completely replacing all uses of runnable_load_avg
> > with load_avg may be too big a leap, i.e., the blocked_load_avg is concerned
> > to result in overrated load. Therefore, we get runnable_load_avg back.
> >
> > The new cfs_rq's runnable_load_avg is improved to be updated with all of the
> > runnable sched_eneities at the same time, so the one sched_entity updated and
> > the others stale problem is solved.
> >
>
> How about tracking cfs_rq's blocked_load_avg instead of
> runnable_load_avg, because, AFAICS:
>
> cfs_rq->runnable_load_avg = se->avg.load_avg - cfs_rq->blocked_load_avg.

No, cfs_rq->runnable_load_avg = cfs_rq->avg.load_avg - cfs_rq->blocked_load_avg,
without rounding errors and the like.

> se is the corresponding sched_entity of cfs_rq. And when we need the
> runnable_load_avg, we just calculate by the expression above.
>
> This can be thought as a lazy way to update runnable_load_avg, and we
> don't need to modify __update_load_avg any more.

Not lazy at all, but adding (as of now) useless blocked_load_avg and an
extra subtraction.

Or did you forget blocked_load_avg also needs to be updated/decayed as
time elapses?


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-07-21 11:01    [W:0.078 / U:3.972 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site