Hi Mike, On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Mike Galbraith <bitbuc...@online.de> wrote: > On Mon, 2013-12-30 at 11:14 +0800, Lei Wen wrote: >> Since we would update rq clock at task enqueue/dequeue, or schedule >> tick. If we don't update the rq clock when our previous task get >> preempted, our new started task would get a relative stale rq clock >> which is updated during the previous task enqueue, or the last schedule >> clock update. > >> @@ -2555,6 +2556,8 @@ need_resched: >> idle_balance(cpu, rq); >> >> put_prev_task(rq, prev); >> + if (update) >> + update_rq_clock(rq); > > If prev remained enqueued, the clock was updated by put_prev_task().
It indeed like that, sorry for the noise... Thanks, Lei -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
