Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965353AbbHLJE6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Aug 2015 05:04:58 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:56713 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964840AbbHLJEy (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Aug 2015 05:04:54 -0400 Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 10:08:08 +0100 From: Morten Rasmussen To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: mingo@redhat.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, daniel.lezcano@linaro.org, Dietmar Eggemann , yuyang.du@intel.com, mturquette@baylibre.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net, Juri Lelli , sgurrappadi@nvidia.com, pang.xunlei@zte.com.cn, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFCv5 PATCH 11/46] sched: Remove blocked load and utilization contributions of dying tasks Message-ID: <20150812090807.GA29326@e105550-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <1436293469-25707-1-git-send-email-morten.rasmussen@arm.com> <1436293469-25707-12-git-send-email-morten.rasmussen@arm.com> <20150811113927.GT19282@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20150811145847.GA20892@e105550-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20150811172344.GO16853@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150811172344.GO16853@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1089 Lines: 23 On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 07:23:44PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 03:58:48PM +0100, Morten Rasmussen wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 01:39:27PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > You add extra code the hot dequeue path for something that 'never' > > > happens. We have the sched_class::task_dead call for that. > > > > I don't mind using sched_class::task_dead() instead. The reason why I > > didn't go that way is that we have to retake the rq->lock or mess with > > cfs_rq::removed_load instead of just not adding the utilization in > > the first place when we have the rq->lock. > > > > Anyway, it is probably redundant by now. I will check Yuyang's code to > > see if he already fixed this problem. > > He did, he used the removed_load stuff, same as migration does. Nice. One less patch to worry about :) -- 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/