On Tue, Sep 06, 2016 at 10:48:39AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Tue, Sep 06, 2016 at 02:05:17PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > > From 295895be8befbab040d6054bb8186c03daabcedd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: Byungchul Park <[email protected]> > > Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 12:22:26 +0900 > > Subject: [PATCH] sched/fair: Fix update_min_vruntime() to get proper > > min_vruntime > > > > Commit 97a7142 'sched/fair: Make update_min_vruntime() more readable' > > introduces a bug that cfs_rq gets a wrong min_vruntime if > > !cfs_rq->rb_leftmost && cfs_rq->curr. This fixes it and makes it more > > readable and simple. > > Urgh, I actually stared at that patch for quite a time and somehow > convinced myself it was good. I actually considered that scenario I > think. > > /me thinks more.. > > Argh, I'm an idiot, you're right. By using min_vruntime() on > cfs_rq->curr we take the leftmost and fail to advance min_vruntime in > that case. > > I'll ask Ingo to take the patch out.
Ok. But I think the combined one is more readable. Don't you think so. It's ok even if you don't. Thank you, Byungchul
