Hi Ingo,
the RT patches for .22 and .23 are passing an incorrect parameter to
rebalance_domains.
I had this queued up for a few days - its still wrong in .22 and .23 RT
patches.
Same issue has been fixed in mainline by:
diff-tree de0cf899bbf06b6f64a5dce9c59d74c41b6b4232 (from
5d2b3d3695a841231b65b55
Author: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
Date: Sun Aug 12 18:08:19 2007 +0200
sched: run_rebalance_domains: s/SCHED_IDLE/CPU_IDLE/
rebalance_domains(SCHED_IDLE) looks strange (typo), change it to
CPU_IDLE.
the effect of this bug was slightly more agressive idle-balancing on
SMP than intended.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
Thanks,
Sven
This parameter was missed when SCHED_IDLE was replaced by CPU_IDLE.
Fixed in mainline by:
commit de0cf899bbf06b6f64a5dce9c59d74c41b6b4232
Author: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
Date: Sun Aug 12 18:08:19 2007 +0200
signed-off-by: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <[email protected]>
Index: linux-2.6.22.1-rt9-broken-out/kernel/sched.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.22.1-rt9-broken-out.orig/kernel/sched.c
+++ linux-2.6.22.1-rt9-broken-out/kernel/sched.c
@@ -3479,7 +3479,7 @@ static void run_rebalance_domains(struct
if (need_resched())
break;
- rebalance_domains(balance_cpu, SCHED_IDLE);
+ rebalance_domains(balance_cpu, CPU_IDLE);
rq = cpu_rq(balance_cpu);
if (time_after(this_rq->next_balance, rq->next_balance))
* Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <[email protected]> wrote:
> Same issue has been fixed in mainline by:
>
> diff-tree de0cf899bbf06b6f64a5dce9c59d74c41b6b4232 (from
> 5d2b3d3695a841231b65b55
> Author: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
> Date: Sun Aug 12 18:08:19 2007 +0200
> signed-off-by: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <[email protected]>
ah, you mean we should pick up an upstream fix for -rt? We'll do that
and we'll pick up much more: all the other ~100 CFS commits that
happened meanwhile. (Btw., there's no need to sign off on patch
forwarding or backport requests - the signoff made me first believe this
is some new patch.)
Ingo
On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 11:15 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Same issue has been fixed in mainline by:
> >
> > diff-tree de0cf899bbf06b6f64a5dce9c59d74c41b6b4232 (from
> > 5d2b3d3695a841231b65b55
> > Author: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
> > Date: Sun Aug 12 18:08:19 2007 +0200
>
> > signed-off-by: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <[email protected]>
>
> ah, you mean we should pick up an upstream fix for -rt?
Well, um yes - I had made the patch a few days ago, but then realized it
was already fixed in mainline.
> We'll do that
> and we'll pick up much more: all the other ~100 CFS commits that
> happened meanwhile. (Btw., there's no need to sign off on patch
> forwarding or backport requests - the signoff made me first believe this
> is some new patch.)
>
Ok. Thanks
Sven