Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753880AbbLONWA (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Dec 2015 08:22:00 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-f51.google.com ([74.125.82.51]:34046 "EHLO mail-wm0-f51.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751272AbbLONV6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Dec 2015 08:21:58 -0500 Subject: Re: [RFCv6 PATCH 09/10] sched: deadline: use deadline bandwidth in scale_rt_capacity To: Peter Zijlstra References: <1449641971-20827-1-git-send-email-smuckle@linaro.org> <1449641971-20827-10-git-send-email-smuckle@linaro.org> <20151214151729.GQ6357@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20151214221231.39b5bc4e@luca-1225C> <566FD446.1080004@unitn.it> <20151215122304.GB6357@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Cc: Vincent Guittot , Steve Muckle , Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , Morten Rasmussen , Dietmar Eggemann , Juri Lelli , Patrick Bellasi , Michael Turquette From: Luca Abeni Message-ID: <567013F4.8010301@unitn.it> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 14:21:56 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20151215122304.GB6357@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1453 Lines: 29 On 12/15/2015 01:23 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 09:50:14AM +0100, Luca Abeni wrote: >> Strictly speaking, the active utilisation must be updated when a task >> wakes up and when a task sleeps/terminates (but when a task sleeps/terminates >> you cannot decrease the active utilisation immediately: you have to wait >> some time because the task might already have used part of its "future >> utilisation"). >> The active utilisation must not be updated when a task is throttled: a >> task is throttled when its current runtime is 0, so it already used all >> of its utilisation for the current period (think about two tasks with >> runtime=50ms and period 100ms: they consume 100% of the time on a CPU, >> and when the first task consumed all of its runtime, you cannot decrease >> the active utilisation). > > Hehe, this reminds me of the lag tracking in EEVDF/WF2Q/BFQ etc., that > had similar issues. Yes, I remember EEVDF and similar algorithms also needed to keep track of the current lag (and to reset it at a later time respect to the "task is blocking" event). I do not remember the exact details, but I "borrowed" the "0-lag time" name from one of those papers :) Luca -- 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/