On 08/26/2014 04:36 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
The computation of avg_load and avg_load_per_task should only takes into account the number of cfs tasks. The non cfs task are already taken into account by decreasing the cpu's capacity and they will be tracked in the CPU's utilization (group_utilization) of the next patches
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot vincent.guittot@linaro.org
kernel/sched/fair.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c index 87b9dc7..b85e9f7 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c @@ -4092,7 +4092,7 @@ static unsigned long capacity_of(int cpu) static unsigned long cpu_avg_load_per_task(int cpu) { struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
- unsigned long nr_running = ACCESS_ONCE(rq->nr_running);
unsigned long nr_running = ACCESS_ONCE(rq->cfs.h_nr_running); unsigned long load_avg = rq->cfs.runnable_load_avg;
if (nr_running)
@@ -5985,7 +5985,7 @@ static inline void update_sg_lb_stats(struct lb_env *env, load = source_load(i, load_idx);
sgs->group_load += load;
sgs->sum_nr_running += rq->nr_running;
sgs->sum_nr_running += rq->cfs.h_nr_running;
Yes this was one of the concerns I had around the usage of rq->nr_running. Looks good to me.
if (rq->nr_running > 1) *overload = true;
Reviewed-by: Preeti U Murthy preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com