From: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
To: Huang Shijie <shijie@os.amperecomputing.com>, <mingo@redhat.com>,
<peterz@infradead.org>, <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
<vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: <patches@amperecomputing.com>, <cl@linux.com>,
<Shubhang@os.amperecomputing.com>, <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
<rostedt@goodmis.org>, <bsegall@google.com>, <mgorman@suse.de>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <vschneid@redhat.com>,
<vineethr@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] sched: update the rq->avg_idle when a task is moved to an idle CPU
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2025 15:42:24 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <14d4ab40-aa3e-48de-99f5-4f1d799b5f7b@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251127091450.250797-3-shijie@os.amperecomputing.com>
Hello Huang Shijie,
On 11/27/2025 2:44 PM, Huang Shijie wrote:
> void enqueue_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)
> {
> + int delayed = p->se.sched_delayed;
> +
> if (!(flags & ENQUEUE_NOCLOCK))
> update_rq_clock(rq);
>
> @@ -2100,6 +2117,13 @@ void enqueue_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)
>
> if (sched_core_enabled(rq))
> sched_core_enqueue(rq, p);
> +
> + if (delayed) {
> + if (entity_eligible(cfs_rq_of(&p->se), &p->se))
> + update_rq_avg_idle(rq);
Question: Why do we want to treat the delayed case like this?
If entity is not eligible, we want to consider that it hasn't
even gone through a wakeup? Wouldn't this lead to the next
wakeup seeing rq->idle_stamp to be non-zero and inaccurately
account more idle time?
Also if we've done newidle balance and the rq->idle_stamp is
set, we cannot have delayed tasks since pick_next_task() would
have dequeued all delayed tasks before reaching newidle
balance.
Just doing a update_rq_avg_idle() unconditionally should be
fine.
> + } else {
> + update_rq_avg_idle(rq);
> + }
> }
>
> /*
--
Thanks and Regards,
Prateek
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-27 10:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-27 9:14 [PATCH v3 0/2] " Huang Shijie
2025-11-27 9:14 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] sched/fair: set rq->idle_stamp at the end of the sched_balance_newidle Huang Shijie
2025-11-27 9:14 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] sched: update the rq->avg_idle when a task is moved to an idle CPU Huang Shijie
2025-11-27 10:12 ` K Prateek Nayak [this message]
2025-11-28 6:30 ` Shijie Huang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=14d4ab40-aa3e-48de-99f5-4f1d799b5f7b@amd.com \
--to=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=Shubhang@os.amperecomputing.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=patches@amperecomputing.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=shijie@os.amperecomputing.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vineethr@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®