On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 11:39:11AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > For task, assuming its load.weight does not change much, yes, we can. But > > > in theory, task's > > > > I would even say that the load_avg of a task should not be impacted by > > an old priority value. Once, the priority of a task is changed, we > > should only take into account this new priority to weight the load_avg > > of the task > > So for tasks I would immediately agree, and I think for groups too, > seeing how the group weight is based off of this avg, if you then > include the old weight we'll get a feedback loop. This might not be > desired as it would counteract the SMP movement of tasks.
Including the old weight can we get the *right* feedback. Because say until weight is changed, we are balanced, changed weight leads to imbalance. Without old weight, the imbalance is multiplied by the history, like we have never been balanced. -- 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/
