Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756177AbaDPMNp (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Apr 2014 08:13:45 -0400 Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:56852 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756063AbaDPMNn (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Apr 2014 08:13:43 -0400 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 14:13:30 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Alex Shi Cc: mingo@redhat.com, morten.rasmussen@arm.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, daniel.lezcano@linaro.org, efault@gmx.de, chris.redpath@arm.com, wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] sched: let task migration destination cpu do active balance Message-ID: <20140416121329.GO26782@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <1397648069-6462-1-git-send-email-alex.shi@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1397648069-6462-1-git-send-email-alex.shi@linaro.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 07:34:29PM +0800, Alex Shi wrote: > Chris Redpath found an issue on active balance: > We let the task source cpu, the busiest cpu, do the active balance, > while the destination cpu maybe idle. thus we take the busiest cpu > time, but left the idlest cpu wait. That is not good for performance. > > This patch let the destination cpu do active balance. It will give tasks > more running time. > > Signed-off-by: Alex Shi > --- > kernel/sched/fair.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c > index 9b4c4f3..cccee76 100644 > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c > @@ -6308,7 +6308,7 @@ more_balance: > raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&busiest->lock, flags); > > if (active_balance) { > - stop_one_cpu_nowait(cpu_of(busiest), > + stop_one_cpu_nowait(busiest->push_cpu, > active_load_balance_cpu_stop, busiest, > &busiest->active_balance_work); > } This doesn't make sense, the whole point of active balance is that we're going to move current, for that to work we have to interrupt the CPU current is running on and make sure another task (the stopper task in this case) is running, so that the previous current is now a !running task and we can move it around. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/