Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   =?UTF-8?q?Jan=20H=2E=20Sch=C3=B6nherr?= <jschoenh@amazon.de>
To:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     =?UTF-8?q?Jan=20H=2E=20Sch=C3=B6nherr?= <jschoenh@amazon.de>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC 45/60] cosched: Continue to account all load on per-CPU runqueues
Date:   Fri,  7 Sep 2018 23:40:32 +0200
Message-Id: <20180907214047.26914-46-jschoenh@amazon.de>
In-Reply-To: <20180907214047.26914-1-jschoenh@amazon.de>
References: <20180907214047.26914-1-jschoenh@amazon.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Even with coscheduling, we define the fields rq->nr_running and rq->load
of per-CPU runqueues to represent the total amount of tasks and the
total amount of load on that CPU, respectively, so that existing code
continues to work as expected.

Make sure to still account load changes on per-CPU runqueues.

The change in set_next_entity() just silences a warning. The code looks
bogus even without coscheduling, as the weight of an SE is independent
from the weight of the runqueue, when task groups are involved. It's
just for statistics anyway.

Signed-off-by: Jan H. Schönherr <jschoenh@amazon.de>
---
 kernel/sched/fair.c | 11 ++++++-----
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index fff88694560c..0bba924b40ba 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -2741,8 +2741,8 @@ static void
 account_entity_enqueue(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se)
 {
 	update_load_add(&cfs_rq->load, se->load.weight);
-	if (!parent_entity(se))
-		update_load_add(&rq_of(cfs_rq)->load, se->load.weight);
+	if (!parent_entity(se) || is_sd_se(parent_entity(se)))
+		update_load_add(&hrq_of(cfs_rq)->load, se->load.weight);
 #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
 	if (entity_is_task(se)) {
 		struct rq *rq = rq_of(cfs_rq);
@@ -2758,8 +2758,8 @@ static void
 account_entity_dequeue(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se)
 {
 	update_load_sub(&cfs_rq->load, se->load.weight);
-	if (!parent_entity(se))
-		update_load_sub(&rq_of(cfs_rq)->load, se->load.weight);
+	if (!parent_entity(se) || is_sd_se(parent_entity(se)))
+		update_load_sub(&hrq_of(cfs_rq)->load, se->load.weight);
 #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
 	if (entity_is_task(se)) {
 		account_numa_dequeue(rq_of(cfs_rq), task_of(se));
@@ -4122,7 +4122,8 @@ set_next_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se)
 	 * least twice that of our own weight (i.e. dont track it
 	 * when there are only lesser-weight tasks around):
 	 */
-	if (schedstat_enabled() && rq_of(cfs_rq)->load.weight >= 2*se->load.weight) {
+	if (schedstat_enabled() &&
+	    hrq_of(cfs_rq)->load.weight >= 2 * se->load.weight) {
 		schedstat_set(se->statistics.slice_max,
 			max((u64)schedstat_val(se->statistics.slice_max),
 			    se->sum_exec_runtime - se->prev_sum_exec_runtime));
-- 
2.9.3.1.gcba166c.dirty