Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2017 13:38:53 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tj@kernel.org,
        josef@toxicpanda.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
        vincent.guittot@linaro.org, efault@gmx.de, pjt@google.com, clm@fb.com,
        dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, bsegall@google.com, yuyang.du@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2 03/18] sched/fair: Cure calc_cfs_shares() vs
 reweight_entity()
Message-ID: <20170929113853.7voni73crg6hfvjx@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20170901132059.342024223@infradead.org>
 <20170901132748.141477819@infradead.org>
 <20170929090434.GB962@e105550-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170929090434.GB962@e105550-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 613
Lines: 15

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 10:04:34AM +0100, Morten Rasmussen wrote:

> > -	load = scale_load_down(cfs_rq->load.weight);
> > +	load = max(scale_load_down(cfs_rq->load.weight), cfs_rq->avg.load_avg);
> 
> We use cfs_rq->tg_load_avg_contrib (the filtered version of
> cfs_rq->avg.load_avg) instead of cfs_rq->avg.load_avg further down, so I
> think we should here too for consistency.
> 
> +	load = max(scale_load_down(cfs_rq->load.weight),
> +		   cfs_rq->tg_load_avg_contrib);
> 

No; we must use tg_load_avg_contrib because that is what's inclded in
tg_weight, but we want to add the most up-to-date value back in.