Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] nohz_full: update cpu load fix in nohz_full

[Alex Shi]

On 12/10/2013 10:02 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>> >  		 * We were idle, this means load 0, the current load might be
>> >  		 * !0 due to remote wakeups and the sort.
>> > +		 * or we may has only one task and in NO_HZ_FULL, then still use
>> > +		 * normal cpu load.
>> >  		 */
>> > -		__update_cpu_load(this_rq, 0, pending_updates);
>> > +		if (this_rq->cfs.h_nr_running) {
>> > +			unsigned load = get_rq_runnable_load(this_rq);
>> > +			__update_cpu_load(this_rq, load, pending_updates);
>> > +		} else
>> > +			__update_cpu_load(this_rq, 0, pending_updates);
> But decay_load_missed() doesnt handle non 0 loads, right? It probably make more sense
> to first fix __update_cpu_load() to make it handle this kind of thing before fixing the caller.
> 
> Now you had patches that remove the cpu_load secondary idx I think? You should move this patc


Thanks for response!
Yes, after get your review, I plan to merge this patch with cpu_load
decay removing, if that patchset possible get to upstream. :)

-- 
Thanks
    Alex
--
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/