From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Chase Douglas <chase.douglas@canonical.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Subject: Re: [REGRESSION 2.6.30][PATCH 1/1] sched: defer idle accounting till after load update period
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 12:27:40 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100401122740.a1ae80a7.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1269870072-22449-2-git-send-email-chase.douglas@canonical.com>
On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 09:41:12 -0400
Chase Douglas <chase.douglas@canonical.com> wrote:
> There's a period of 10 ticks where calc_load_tasks is updated by all the
> cpus for the load avg. Usually all the cpus do this during the first
> tick. If any cpus go idle, calc_load_tasks is decremented accordingly.
> However, if they wake up calc_load_tasks is not incremented. Thus, if
> cpus go idle during the 10 tick period, calc_load_tasks may be
> decremented to a non-representative value. This issue can lead to
> systems having a load avg of exactly 0, even though the real load avg
> could theoretically be up to NR_CPUS.
>
> This change defers calc_load_tasks accounting after each cpu updates the
> count until after the 10 tick period.
>
> BugLink: http://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
>
There was useful information in the [patch 0/1] email, such as the
offending commit ID. If possible, it's best to avoid the [patch 0/n]
thing altogether - that information either has to be moved into the
[patch 1/n] changelog by someone (ie: me), or it just gets ommitted and
lost.
> ---
> kernel/sched.c | 16 ++++++++++++++--
> 1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c
> index 9ab3cd7..c0aedac 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched.c
> @@ -3064,7 +3064,8 @@ void calc_global_load(void)
> */
> static void calc_load_account_active(struct rq *this_rq)
> {
> - long nr_active, delta;
> + static atomic_long_t deferred;
> + long nr_active, delta, deferred_delta;
>
> nr_active = this_rq->nr_running;
> nr_active += (long) this_rq->nr_uninterruptible;
> @@ -3072,6 +3073,17 @@ static void calc_load_account_active(struct rq *this_rq)
> if (nr_active != this_rq->calc_load_active) {
> delta = nr_active - this_rq->calc_load_active;
> this_rq->calc_load_active = nr_active;
> +
> + /* Need to defer idle accounting during load update period: */
> + if (unlikely(time_before(jiffies, this_rq->calc_load_update) &&
> + time_after_eq(jiffies, calc_load_update))) {
> + atomic_long_add(delta, &deferred);
> + return;
> + }
That seems a sensible way to avoid the gross-looking "10 ticks" thing.
What was the reason for "update the avenrun load estimates 10 ticks
after the CPUs have updated calc_load_tasks"? Can we do something
smarter there to fix this?
> + deferred_delta = atomic_long_xchg(&deferred, 0);
> + delta += deferred_delta;
> +
> atomic_long_add(delta, &calc_load_tasks);
> }
> }
The global `deferred' is unfortunate from a design and possibly
scalability POV. Can it be moved into the `struct rq'? That way it
can become a plain old `unsigned long', too.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-01 19:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-29 13:41 [REGRESSION 2.6.30][PATCH 0/1] " Chase Douglas
2010-03-29 13:41 ` [REGRESSION 2.6.30][PATCH 1/1] " Chase Douglas
2010-03-29 14:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-29 17:20 ` Chase Douglas
2010-04-01 19:27 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2010-04-01 19:37 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-04-01 20:00 ` Chase Douglas
2010-04-01 20:18 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-04-01 20:32 ` Chase Douglas
2010-04-01 20:37 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-04-02 7:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-05 14:44 ` Chase Douglas
2010-04-01 19:56 ` Chase Douglas
2010-04-01 20:01 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-04-13 20:39 ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-13 21:02 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-04-13 21:06 ` Chase Douglas
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=20100401122740.a1ae80a7.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chase.douglas@canonical.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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
Powered by JetHome