Messages in this thread | | | From | Vincent Guittot <> | Date | Tue, 2 May 2017 15:38:12 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] sched/fair: update scale invariance of PELT |
| |
On 1 May 2017 at 11:00, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 12:09:24AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 11:18:29AM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote: >> > +++ b/include/linux/sched.h >> > @@ -313,6 +313,7 @@ struct load_weight { >> > */ >> > struct sched_avg { >> > u64 last_update_time; >> > + u64 stolen_idle_time; >> > u64 load_sum; >> > u32 util_sum; >> > u32 period_contrib; >> >> > + if (sa->util_sum < (LOAD_AVG_MAX * 1000)) { >> > + /* >> > + * Add the idle time stolen by running at lower compute >> > + * capacity >> > + */ >> > + delta += sa->stolen_idle_time; >> > + } >> > + sa->stolen_idle_time = 0; >> >> >> So I was wondering if stolen_idle_time really needs to be a u64. Afaict >> we'll be at LOAD_AVG_MAX after LOAD_AVG_MAX_N periods, or LOAD_AVG_MAX_N >> * LOAD_AVG_PERIOD time, which ends up being 11040. > > * 1024 or course, but still easily fits in u32.
Correct
>
| |