On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 01:45:25PM +0100, Morten Rasmussen wrote: > > > > + * Basically (4) but in differential form: > > > > + * > > > > + * d(runnable_avg) += se->avg.load_avg / se->load.weight > > > > + * (5) > > > > + * ge->avg.load_avg += ge->load.weight * d(runnable_avg) > > > > And this all has runnable again, and so should make sense. > > I'm afraid I don't quite get why (5) is correct. It might be related to > the issues Vincent already pointed out.
Yeah; I think so... Let me stare at his latest -- which still doesn't update this comment.. :/
