Messages in this thread | | | From | Vincent Guittot <> | Date | Wed, 15 Sep 2021 14:30:56 +0200 | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH v2 4/5] sched/fair: Simplify load_cfs_rq_list maintenance |
| |
On Tue, 14 Sept 2021 at 11:45, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Tue, 14 Sept 2021 at 11:22, Michal Koutný <mkoutny@suse.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 04:19:27PM +0200, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> wrote: > > > Your proposal looks interesting but I need more time to make sure that > > > all cases are covered. We have faced several odd corner cases and > > > sequences in the past that I need time to check that you don't put > > > some back > > > > Do you have any pointers to the cases that come to your mind? I wonder > > if those could be reproduced with a simple setup. > > I don't have a strict list but several warnings for leaf_list have > been already reported on lkml in the past and the use cases were quite > complicated and I want to go through them to make sure they are still > covered.
The corner cases that I wanted to check, are covered by a7b359fc6a37 ("sched/fair: Correctly insert cfs_rq's to list on unthrottle") and fdaba61ef8a2 ("sched/fair: Ensure that the CFS parent is added after unthrottling")
This patch looks ok to me. Also, propagate_entity_cfs_rq() could also get advantage of the same kind of change
> > Vincent > > > (FTR, I used the LTP test (at b673f49ae) cfs_bandwidth01 to check this change.) > > > > Thanks, > > Michal
| |