On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 12:54:14PM -0700, Jason Low wrote: > Preeti mentioned that sd->balance_interval is changed during load_balance(). > Should we also consider updating the interval in rebalance_domains() after > calling load_balance(),
Yeah, that might make sense. > and also taking max_load_balance_interval into account > in the updates for next_balance in idle_balance()? I was thinking that max_load_balance_interval thing was mostly about the *busy_factor thing, but sure, can't hurt to be consistent and always do it. > If so, how about the something like the below change which also introduces > get_sd_balance_interval() to obtain the sd's balance interval, and have both > update_next_balance() and rebalance_domains() use that function. Yes, that looks good. Can you send it with a proper changelog? -- 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/