Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] kvm: Be courteous to other VMs in overcommittedscenario in PLE handler

From: Avi Kivity
Date: Mon Sep 24 2012 - 11:43:32 EST


On 09/24/2012 05:34 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 17:26 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> I think this is a no-op these (CFS) days. To get schedule() to do
>> anything, you need to wake up a task, or let time pass, or block.
>> Otherwise it will see that nothing has changed and as far as it's
>> concerned you're still the best task to be running (otherwise it
>> wouldn't have picked you in the first place).
>
> Time could have passed enough before calling this that there's now a
> different/more eligible task around to schedule.

Wouldn't this correspond to the scheduler interrupt firing and causing a
reschedule? I thought the timer was programmed for exactly the point in
time that CFS considers the right time for a switch. But I'm basing
this on my mental model of CFS, not CFS itself.

> Esp. for a !PREEMPT kernel this is could be significant.


--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/