Commit e5fc6611 can potentially cause rq->max_idle_balance_cost to not be
updated, even when load_balance(NEWLY_IDLE) is attempted and the per-sd
max cost value is updated.
In this patch, we update the rq->max_idle_balance_cost regardless of
whether or not a task has been enqueued while browsing the domains.
Signed-off-by: Jason Low <jason.l...@hp.com>
---
kernel/sched/fair.c | 9 +++++----
1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 43232b8..3e3ffb8 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -6658,6 +6658,7 @@ static int idle_balance(struct rq *this_rq)
int this_cpu = this_rq->cpu;
idle_enter_fair(this_rq);
+
/*
* We must set idle_stamp _before_ calling idle_balance(), such that we
* measure the duration of idle_balance() as idle time.
@@ -6710,9 +6711,12 @@ static int idle_balance(struct rq *this_rq)
raw_spin_lock(&this_rq->lock);
+ if (curr_cost > this_rq->max_idle_balance_cost)
+ this_rq->max_idle_balance_cost = curr_cost;
+
/*
* While browsing the domains, we released the rq lock.
- * A task could have be enqueued in the meantime
+ * A task could have been enqueued in the meantime.
*/
if (this_rq->cfs.h_nr_running && !pulled_task) {
pulled_task = 1;
@@ -6727,9 +6731,6 @@ static int idle_balance(struct rq *this_rq)
this_rq->next_balance = next_balance;
}
- if (curr_cost > this_rq->max_idle_balance_cost)
- this_rq->max_idle_balance_cost = curr_cost;
-
out:
/* Is there a task of a high priority class? */
if (this_rq->nr_running != this_rq->cfs.h_nr_running)
--
1.7.1
--
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/
