Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753308AbaFWK6b (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jun 2014 06:58:31 -0400 Received: from relay.parallels.com ([195.214.232.42]:51178 "EHLO relay.parallels.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751066AbaFWK6a (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jun 2014 06:58:30 -0400 Message-ID: <1403521103.3462.13.camel@tkhai> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched/fair: Disable runtime_enabled on dying rq From: Kirill Tkhai To: Peter Zijlstra CC: , Ingo Molnar , , Srikar Dronamraju , "Mike Galbraith" , Konstantin Khorenko Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 14:58:23 +0400 In-Reply-To: <20140623100724.GU19860@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20140617130442.29933.54945.stgit@tkhai> <1403011450.27674.44.camel@tkhai> <20140623100724.GU19860@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net> Organization: Parallels Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.8.5-2+b3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.30.26.172] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org В Пн, 23/06/2014 в 12:07 +0200, Peter Zijlstra пишет: > On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 05:24:10PM +0400, Kirill Tkhai wrote: > > @@ -3790,6 +3803,12 @@ static void __maybe_unused unthrottle_offline_cfs_rqs(struct rq *rq) > > cfs_rq->runtime_remaining = 1; > > if (cfs_rq_throttled(cfs_rq)) > > unthrottle_cfs_rq(cfs_rq); > > + > > + /* > > + * Offline rq is schedulable till cpu is completely disabled > > + * in take_cpu_down(), so we prevent new cfs throttling here. > > + */ > > + cfs_rq->runtime_enabled = 0; > > Does it make sense to clear this before calling unthrottle_cfs_rq()? > Just to make sure they're in the right order.. This looks good for me. I'll test and resend. > > > } > > } -- 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/