From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Chase Douglas <chase.douglas@canonical.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
kernel-team <kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com>
Subject: Re: [REGRESSION 2.6.30][PATCH 1/1] sched: defer idle accounting till after load update period
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 22:37:39 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1004012233550.32352@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m2k40ec3ea41004011332t80436b03q69ff8cad735037a@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, 1 Apr 2010, Chase Douglas wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 4:18 PM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
> > Also we need to think about a more clever way than just accounting the
> > number of running and uninterruptible tasks. What we really want is to
> > use the numbers which the scheduler has handy, i.e how many tasks did
> > we run since we did the last loadavg calculation. It was always
> > possible (even before the big loadavg changes) to create a task which
> > consumes 50% of a CPU and never shows up in the loadavg calculations
> > at all.
>
> I'm not sure I follow how knowing how many tasks have been run since
> the last LOAD_FREQ expiration will help, or is that just an example of
> the kind of data the scheduler has available that may be useful?
Yes, it's just an example. Look at the following (UP) scenario:
-> tick calcs loadavg
-> task is woken and runs for 50% of a tick
-> task goes to sleep
-> tick calcs loadavg
So loadavg will say 0 forever, while we in reality know that there was
significant work on that CPU - at least when we have a sched_clock
which has a better granularity than the tick itself.
Thanks,
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-01 20:37 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
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 [this message]
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=alpine.LFD.2.00.1004012233550.32352@localhost.localdomain \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chase.douglas@canonical.com \
--cc=kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
/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