Re: Seems like "sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()" should be reverted in 3.5 branch
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 11:39:37AM +0800, 陈华才 wrote: > So I still think that "sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()" > should be reverted in 3.5 branch... 3.5 is now end-of-life, with no more releases, everyone should have moved off of it to 3.6 now, so there's nothing to do here anymore. thanks, greg k-h -- 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/
Re: Seems like sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() should be reverted in 3.5 branch
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 11:39:37AM +0800, 陈华才 wrote: So I still think that sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() should be reverted in 3.5 branch... 3.5 is now end-of-life, with no more releases, everyone should have moved off of it to 3.6 now, so there's nothing to do here anymore. thanks, greg k-h -- 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/
Re: Seems like "sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()" should be reverted in 3.5 branch
So I still think that "sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()" should be reverted in 3.5 branch... > On 10/06/2012 01:23 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> On Fri, 2012-10-05 at 10:10 -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >>> Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >>> > I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not? So I think the current v3.5.5 code is fine. >>> >>> Now I'm puzzled. You wrote: >>> >>> | However, since we don't restart the tick, we won't be sampling load >>> muck >>> | and calling calc_load_exit_idle() from there is bound to confuse >>> state. >>> >>> Doesn't that mean 900404e5d201 "sched: Add missing call to >>> calc_load_exit_idle()" which is part of 3.5.5 was problematic? Or >>> did I just miscount the number of "not"s? >> >> >> Argh, yeah, so now I've managed to confuse everyone I'm afraid. >> >> You are right, v3.5.5 has one calc_load_exit_idle() too many, the one in >> tick_nohz_update_jiffies() needs to go. >> >> Sorry.. I got entirely confused figuring out wth happened with 3.6. >> > High loadavg reported with v3.6, and I just checked the upstream code, > which puzzled many people. Sorry for that~ > -- 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/
Re: Seems like sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() should be reverted in 3.5 branch
So I still think that sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() should be reverted in 3.5 branch... On 10/06/2012 01:23 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Fri, 2012-10-05 at 10:10 -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not? So I think the current v3.5.5 code is fine. Now I'm puzzled. You wrote: | However, since we don't restart the tick, we won't be sampling load muck | and calling calc_load_exit_idle() from there is bound to confuse state. Doesn't that mean 900404e5d201 sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() which is part of 3.5.5 was problematic? Or did I just miscount the number of nots? Argh, yeah, so now I've managed to confuse everyone I'm afraid. You are right, v3.5.5 has one calc_load_exit_idle() too many, the one in tick_nohz_update_jiffies() needs to go. Sorry.. I got entirely confused figuring out wth happened with 3.6. High loadavg reported with v3.6, and I just checked the upstream code, which puzzled many people. Sorry for that~ -- 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/
Re: Seems like "sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()" should be reverted in 3.5 branch
On 10/06/2012 01:23 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Fri, 2012-10-05 at 10:10 -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not? So I think the current v3.5.5 code is fine. Now I'm puzzled. You wrote: | However, since we don't restart the tick, we won't be sampling load muck | and calling calc_load_exit_idle() from there is bound to confuse state. Doesn't that mean 900404e5d201 "sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()" which is part of 3.5.5 was problematic? Or did I just miscount the number of "not"s? Argh, yeah, so now I've managed to confuse everyone I'm afraid. You are right, v3.5.5 has one calc_load_exit_idle() too many, the one in tick_nohz_update_jiffies() needs to go. Sorry.. I got entirely confused figuring out wth happened with 3.6. High loadavg reported with v3.6, and I just checked the upstream code, which puzzled many people. Sorry for that~ -- 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/
Re: Seems like "sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()" should be reverted in 3.5 branch
On 10/05/2012 09:39 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
I can't find wtf went wrong either, the initial patch 5167e8d5417bf5c
contains both hunks, but in that case the fixup 749c8814f0 doesn't make
sense, not can I find anything in merge commits using:
git log -S calc_load_exit_idle kernel/time/tick-sched.c
git log -m -p --first-parent -Scalc_load_exit_idle -- kernel/time/tick-sched.c
finds 3992c0321258 ("Merge branch 'timers-core-for-linus'",
2012-07-22), which seems to have mismerged 2ac0d98fd624 ("nohz: Make
nohz API agnostic against idle ticks cputime accounting").
That's it. Patch 2ac0d98fd624 and 19f5f7364("nohz: Separate idle
sleeping time accounting from nohz logic") are produced on 2011-07-28,
merged on 2012-07-22, right after 5167e8d5417bf5c, but applied before
5167e8d5417bf5c.
These two patches changed tick_nohz_idle_exit, which causing Peter's
patch 5167e8d5417bf5c couldn't fully be applied.
There should be conflict being reported, but why we don't get is really
confused.
Thanks,
Jonathan
--
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/
--
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/
Re: Seems like sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() should be reverted in 3.5 branch
On 10/05/2012 09:39 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: Peter Zijlstra wrote: I can't find wtf went wrong either, the initial patch 5167e8d5417bf5c contains both hunks, but in that case the fixup 749c8814f0 doesn't make sense, not can I find anything in merge commits using: git log -S calc_load_exit_idle kernel/time/tick-sched.c git log -m -p --first-parent -Scalc_load_exit_idle -- kernel/time/tick-sched.c finds 3992c0321258 (Merge branch 'timers-core-for-linus', 2012-07-22), which seems to have mismerged 2ac0d98fd624 (nohz: Make nohz API agnostic against idle ticks cputime accounting). That's it. Patch 2ac0d98fd624 and 19f5f7364(nohz: Separate idle sleeping time accounting from nohz logic) are produced on 2011-07-28, merged on 2012-07-22, right after 5167e8d5417bf5c, but applied before 5167e8d5417bf5c. These two patches changed tick_nohz_idle_exit, which causing Peter's patch 5167e8d5417bf5c couldn't fully be applied. There should be conflict being reported, but why we don't get is really confused. Thanks, Jonathan -- 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/ -- 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/
Re: Seems like sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() should be reverted in 3.5 branch
On 10/06/2012 01:23 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Fri, 2012-10-05 at 10:10 -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not? So I think the current v3.5.5 code is fine. Now I'm puzzled. You wrote: | However, since we don't restart the tick, we won't be sampling load muck | and calling calc_load_exit_idle() from there is bound to confuse state. Doesn't that mean 900404e5d201 sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() which is part of 3.5.5 was problematic? Or did I just miscount the number of nots? Argh, yeah, so now I've managed to confuse everyone I'm afraid. You are right, v3.5.5 has one calc_load_exit_idle() too many, the one in tick_nohz_update_jiffies() needs to go. Sorry.. I got entirely confused figuring out wth happened with 3.6. High loadavg reported with v3.6, and I just checked the upstream code, which puzzled many people. Sorry for that~ -- 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/
Re: Seems like "sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()" should be reverted in 3.5 branch
On Fri, 2012-10-05 at 10:10 -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > >> I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not? > > > > So I think the current v3.5.5 code is fine. > > Now I'm puzzled. You wrote: > > | However, since we don't restart the tick, we won't be sampling load muck > | and calling calc_load_exit_idle() from there is bound to confuse state. > > Doesn't that mean 900404e5d201 "sched: Add missing call to > calc_load_exit_idle()" which is part of 3.5.5 was problematic? Or > did I just miscount the number of "not"s? Argh, yeah, so now I've managed to confuse everyone I'm afraid. You are right, v3.5.5 has one calc_load_exit_idle() too many, the one in tick_nohz_update_jiffies() needs to go. Sorry.. I got entirely confused figuring out wth happened with 3.6. -- 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/
Re: Seems like "sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()" should be reverted in 3.5 branch
Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >> I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not? > > So I think the current v3.5.5 code is fine. Now I'm puzzled. You wrote: | However, since we don't restart the tick, we won't be sampling load muck | and calling calc_load_exit_idle() from there is bound to confuse state. Doesn't that mean 900404e5d201 "sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()" which is part of 3.5.5 was problematic? Or did I just miscount the number of "not"s? -- 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/
Re: Seems like "sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()" should be reverted in 3.5 branch
On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 12:21:06PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not? > > So I think the current v3.5.5 code is fine. I'm just not smart enough to > figure out how 3.6 got fuzzed, this git thing is confusing as hell. Thanks for letting me know, and digging through this, I'll leave things as-is. greg k-h -- 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/
Re: Seems like "sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()" should be reverted in 3.5 branch
On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not? So I think the current v3.5.5 code is fine. I'm just not smart enough to figure out how 3.6 got fuzzed, this git thing is confusing as hell. -- 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/
Re: Seems like sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() should be reverted in 3.5 branch
On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not? So I think the current v3.5.5 code is fine. I'm just not smart enough to figure out how 3.6 got fuzzed, this git thing is confusing as hell. -- 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/
Re: Seems like sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() should be reverted in 3.5 branch
On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 12:21:06PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not? So I think the current v3.5.5 code is fine. I'm just not smart enough to figure out how 3.6 got fuzzed, this git thing is confusing as hell. Thanks for letting me know, and digging through this, I'll leave things as-is. greg k-h -- 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/
Re: Seems like sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() should be reverted in 3.5 branch
Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not? So I think the current v3.5.5 code is fine. Now I'm puzzled. You wrote: | However, since we don't restart the tick, we won't be sampling load muck | and calling calc_load_exit_idle() from there is bound to confuse state. Doesn't that mean 900404e5d201 sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() which is part of 3.5.5 was problematic? Or did I just miscount the number of nots? -- 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/
Re: Seems like sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() should be reverted in 3.5 branch
On Fri, 2012-10-05 at 10:10 -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not? So I think the current v3.5.5 code is fine. Now I'm puzzled. You wrote: | However, since we don't restart the tick, we won't be sampling load muck | and calling calc_load_exit_idle() from there is bound to confuse state. Doesn't that mean 900404e5d201 sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() which is part of 3.5.5 was problematic? Or did I just miscount the number of nots? Argh, yeah, so now I've managed to confuse everyone I'm afraid. You are right, v3.5.5 has one calc_load_exit_idle() too many, the one in tick_nohz_update_jiffies() needs to go. Sorry.. I got entirely confused figuring out wth happened with 3.6. -- 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/
Re: Seems like "sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()" should be reverted in 3.5 branch
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> I can't find wtf went wrong either, the initial patch 5167e8d5417bf5c
> contains both hunks, but in that case the fixup 749c8814f0 doesn't make
> sense, not can I find anything in merge commits using:
>
> git log -S calc_load_exit_idle kernel/time/tick-sched.c
git log -m -p --first-parent -Scalc_load_exit_idle -- kernel/time/tick-sched.c
finds 3992c0321258 ("Merge branch 'timers-core-for-linus'",
2012-07-22), which seems to have mismerged 2ac0d98fd624 ("nohz: Make
nohz API agnostic against idle ticks cputime accounting").
Thanks,
Jonathan
--
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/
Re: Seems like "sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()" should be reverted in 3.5 branch
My opinion: The original patch "sched/nohz: Rewrite and fix load-avg computation -- again" is designed for 3.5-branch and calc_load_exit_idle() is called directly in tick_nohz_idle_exit(). So, the patch can be fully applied in 3.5 and doesn't need to fix (Add the missing call), but not fully applied in 3.6 (because code splitted) and need to fix. > On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 08:31:59PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 10:46 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >> > On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 12:11:01PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote: >> > > Hi, Greg >> > > >> > > I found that Linux-3.5.5 accept this commit "sched: Add missing call >> > > to calc_load_exit_idle()" but I think this isn't needed. Because >> > > "5167e8d5417b sched/nohz: Rewrite and fix load-avg computation -- >> > > again not fully applied" is true for 3.6 branch, but not for 3.5 >> > > branch. >> > >> > But 5167e8d5417b is in 3.5, so shouldn't this commit still be >> necessary? >> > >> > > In 3.5 branch, calc_load_exit_idle() is already called in >> > > tick_nohz_idle_exit(), it doesn't need to be called at >> > > tick_nohz_update_jiffies() again. In 3.6 branch, some code of >> > > tick_nohz_idle_exit() is splitted to tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick() >> > > and calc_load_exit_idle() is missing by accident, so commit "sched: >> > > Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()" is needed. >> > >> > So this really should be dropped from 3.5? Charles, Peter, Ingo, any >> > thoughts here? >> >> Bah, lots of code movement there recently.. let me try and untangle all >> that afresh.. /me checks out v3.5.5. >> >> OK, assuming ->tick_stopped means what the label says, then we only want >> to call calc_load_enter_idle() when it flips to 1 and >> calc_load_exit_idle() when it flips back to 0, such that when an actual >> tick happens its got correct state. >> >> Now the actual patch "5167e8d5417b sched/nohz: Rewrite and fix load-avg >> computation -- again not fully applied" modifies >> tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick() which doesn't appear to exist in v3.5.5 >> and the patch fobbed it into tick_nohz_update_jiffies() which is called >> from interrupt entry when nohz-idle so that the interrupt (and possible >> tailing softirq) see a valid jiffies count. >> >> However, since we don't restart the tick, we won't be sampling load muck >> and calling calc_load_exit_idle() from there is bound to confuse state. >> >> I hope.. damn this code ;-) >> >> I can't find wtf went wrong either, the initial patch 5167e8d5417bf5c >> contains both hunks, but in that case the fixup 749c8814f0 doesn't make >> sense, not can I find anything in merge commits using: >> >> git log -S calc_load_exit_idle kernel/time/tick-sched.c >> >> /me puzzled > > I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not? > > greg k-h > -- 江苏中科梦兰电子科技有限公司 软件部 陈华才 E-mail: che...@lemote.com Web: http://www.lemote.com/ Add: 江苏省常熟市虞山镇梦兰工业园 -- 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/
Re: Seems like "sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()" should be reverted in 3.5 branch
On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 08:31:59PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 10:46 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 12:11:01PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote: > > > Hi, Greg > > > > > > I found that Linux-3.5.5 accept this commit "sched: Add missing call > > > to calc_load_exit_idle()" but I think this isn't needed. Because > > > "5167e8d5417b sched/nohz: Rewrite and fix load-avg computation -- > > > again not fully applied" is true for 3.6 branch, but not for 3.5 > > > branch. > > > > But 5167e8d5417b is in 3.5, so shouldn't this commit still be necessary? > > > > > In 3.5 branch, calc_load_exit_idle() is already called in > > > tick_nohz_idle_exit(), it doesn't need to be called at > > > tick_nohz_update_jiffies() again. In 3.6 branch, some code of > > > tick_nohz_idle_exit() is splitted to tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick() > > > and calc_load_exit_idle() is missing by accident, so commit "sched: > > > Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()" is needed. > > > > So this really should be dropped from 3.5? Charles, Peter, Ingo, any > > thoughts here? > > Bah, lots of code movement there recently.. let me try and untangle all > that afresh.. /me checks out v3.5.5. > > OK, assuming ->tick_stopped means what the label says, then we only want > to call calc_load_enter_idle() when it flips to 1 and > calc_load_exit_idle() when it flips back to 0, such that when an actual > tick happens its got correct state. > > Now the actual patch "5167e8d5417b sched/nohz: Rewrite and fix load-avg > computation -- again not fully applied" modifies > tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick() which doesn't appear to exist in v3.5.5 > and the patch fobbed it into tick_nohz_update_jiffies() which is called > from interrupt entry when nohz-idle so that the interrupt (and possible > tailing softirq) see a valid jiffies count. > > However, since we don't restart the tick, we won't be sampling load muck > and calling calc_load_exit_idle() from there is bound to confuse state. > > I hope.. damn this code ;-) > > I can't find wtf went wrong either, the initial patch 5167e8d5417bf5c > contains both hunks, but in that case the fixup 749c8814f0 doesn't make > sense, not can I find anything in merge commits using: > > git log -S calc_load_exit_idle kernel/time/tick-sched.c > > /me puzzled I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not? greg k-h -- 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/
Re: Seems like "sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()" should be reverted in 3.5 branch
On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 10:46 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 12:11:01PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote: > > Hi, Greg > > > > I found that Linux-3.5.5 accept this commit "sched: Add missing call > > to calc_load_exit_idle()" but I think this isn't needed. Because > > "5167e8d5417b sched/nohz: Rewrite and fix load-avg computation -- > > again not fully applied" is true for 3.6 branch, but not for 3.5 > > branch. > > But 5167e8d5417b is in 3.5, so shouldn't this commit still be necessary? > > > In 3.5 branch, calc_load_exit_idle() is already called in > > tick_nohz_idle_exit(), it doesn't need to be called at > > tick_nohz_update_jiffies() again. In 3.6 branch, some code of > > tick_nohz_idle_exit() is splitted to tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick() > > and calc_load_exit_idle() is missing by accident, so commit "sched: > > Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()" is needed. > > So this really should be dropped from 3.5? Charles, Peter, Ingo, any > thoughts here? Bah, lots of code movement there recently.. let me try and untangle all that afresh.. /me checks out v3.5.5. OK, assuming ->tick_stopped means what the label says, then we only want to call calc_load_enter_idle() when it flips to 1 and calc_load_exit_idle() when it flips back to 0, such that when an actual tick happens its got correct state. Now the actual patch "5167e8d5417b sched/nohz: Rewrite and fix load-avg computation -- again not fully applied" modifies tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick() which doesn't appear to exist in v3.5.5 and the patch fobbed it into tick_nohz_update_jiffies() which is called from interrupt entry when nohz-idle so that the interrupt (and possible tailing softirq) see a valid jiffies count. However, since we don't restart the tick, we won't be sampling load muck and calling calc_load_exit_idle() from there is bound to confuse state. I hope.. damn this code ;-) I can't find wtf went wrong either, the initial patch 5167e8d5417bf5c contains both hunks, but in that case the fixup 749c8814f0 doesn't make sense, not can I find anything in merge commits using: git log -S calc_load_exit_idle kernel/time/tick-sched.c /me puzzled -- 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/
Re: Seems like "sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()" should be reverted in 3.5 branch
On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 12:11:01PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote: > Hi, Greg > > I found that Linux-3.5.5 accept this commit "sched: Add missing call > to calc_load_exit_idle()" but I think this isn't needed. Because > "5167e8d5417b sched/nohz: Rewrite and fix load-avg computation -- > again not fully applied" is true for 3.6 branch, but not for 3.5 > branch. But 5167e8d5417b is in 3.5, so shouldn't this commit still be necessary? > In 3.5 branch, calc_load_exit_idle() is already called in > tick_nohz_idle_exit(), it doesn't need to be called at > tick_nohz_update_jiffies() again. In 3.6 branch, some code of > tick_nohz_idle_exit() is splitted to tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick() > and calc_load_exit_idle() is missing by accident, so commit "sched: > Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()" is needed. So this really should be dropped from 3.5? Charles, Peter, Ingo, any thoughts here? thanks, greg k-h -- 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/
Re: Seems like sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() should be reverted in 3.5 branch
On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 12:11:01PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote: Hi, Greg I found that Linux-3.5.5 accept this commit sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() but I think this isn't needed. Because 5167e8d5417b sched/nohz: Rewrite and fix load-avg computation -- again not fully applied is true for 3.6 branch, but not for 3.5 branch. But 5167e8d5417b is in 3.5, so shouldn't this commit still be necessary? In 3.5 branch, calc_load_exit_idle() is already called in tick_nohz_idle_exit(), it doesn't need to be called at tick_nohz_update_jiffies() again. In 3.6 branch, some code of tick_nohz_idle_exit() is splitted to tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick() and calc_load_exit_idle() is missing by accident, so commit sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() is needed. So this really should be dropped from 3.5? Charles, Peter, Ingo, any thoughts here? thanks, greg k-h -- 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/
Re: Seems like sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() should be reverted in 3.5 branch
On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 10:46 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 12:11:01PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote: Hi, Greg I found that Linux-3.5.5 accept this commit sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() but I think this isn't needed. Because 5167e8d5417b sched/nohz: Rewrite and fix load-avg computation -- again not fully applied is true for 3.6 branch, but not for 3.5 branch. But 5167e8d5417b is in 3.5, so shouldn't this commit still be necessary? In 3.5 branch, calc_load_exit_idle() is already called in tick_nohz_idle_exit(), it doesn't need to be called at tick_nohz_update_jiffies() again. In 3.6 branch, some code of tick_nohz_idle_exit() is splitted to tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick() and calc_load_exit_idle() is missing by accident, so commit sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() is needed. So this really should be dropped from 3.5? Charles, Peter, Ingo, any thoughts here? Bah, lots of code movement there recently.. let me try and untangle all that afresh.. /me checks out v3.5.5. OK, assuming -tick_stopped means what the label says, then we only want to call calc_load_enter_idle() when it flips to 1 and calc_load_exit_idle() when it flips back to 0, such that when an actual tick happens its got correct state. Now the actual patch 5167e8d5417b sched/nohz: Rewrite and fix load-avg computation -- again not fully applied modifies tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick() which doesn't appear to exist in v3.5.5 and the patch fobbed it into tick_nohz_update_jiffies() which is called from interrupt entry when nohz-idle so that the interrupt (and possible tailing softirq) see a valid jiffies count. However, since we don't restart the tick, we won't be sampling load muck and calling calc_load_exit_idle() from there is bound to confuse state. I hope.. damn this code ;-) I can't find wtf went wrong either, the initial patch 5167e8d5417bf5c contains both hunks, but in that case the fixup 749c8814f0 doesn't make sense, not can I find anything in merge commits using: git log -S calc_load_exit_idle kernel/time/tick-sched.c /me puzzled -- 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/
Re: Seems like sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() should be reverted in 3.5 branch
On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 08:31:59PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 10:46 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 12:11:01PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote: Hi, Greg I found that Linux-3.5.5 accept this commit sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() but I think this isn't needed. Because 5167e8d5417b sched/nohz: Rewrite and fix load-avg computation -- again not fully applied is true for 3.6 branch, but not for 3.5 branch. But 5167e8d5417b is in 3.5, so shouldn't this commit still be necessary? In 3.5 branch, calc_load_exit_idle() is already called in tick_nohz_idle_exit(), it doesn't need to be called at tick_nohz_update_jiffies() again. In 3.6 branch, some code of tick_nohz_idle_exit() is splitted to tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick() and calc_load_exit_idle() is missing by accident, so commit sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() is needed. So this really should be dropped from 3.5? Charles, Peter, Ingo, any thoughts here? Bah, lots of code movement there recently.. let me try and untangle all that afresh.. /me checks out v3.5.5. OK, assuming -tick_stopped means what the label says, then we only want to call calc_load_enter_idle() when it flips to 1 and calc_load_exit_idle() when it flips back to 0, such that when an actual tick happens its got correct state. Now the actual patch 5167e8d5417b sched/nohz: Rewrite and fix load-avg computation -- again not fully applied modifies tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick() which doesn't appear to exist in v3.5.5 and the patch fobbed it into tick_nohz_update_jiffies() which is called from interrupt entry when nohz-idle so that the interrupt (and possible tailing softirq) see a valid jiffies count. However, since we don't restart the tick, we won't be sampling load muck and calling calc_load_exit_idle() from there is bound to confuse state. I hope.. damn this code ;-) I can't find wtf went wrong either, the initial patch 5167e8d5417bf5c contains both hunks, but in that case the fixup 749c8814f0 doesn't make sense, not can I find anything in merge commits using: git log -S calc_load_exit_idle kernel/time/tick-sched.c /me puzzled I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not? greg k-h -- 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/
Re: Seems like sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() should be reverted in 3.5 branch
My opinion: The original patch sched/nohz: Rewrite and fix load-avg computation -- again is designed for 3.5-branch and calc_load_exit_idle() is called directly in tick_nohz_idle_exit(). So, the patch can be fully applied in 3.5 and doesn't need to fix (Add the missing call), but not fully applied in 3.6 (because code splitted) and need to fix. On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 08:31:59PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 10:46 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 12:11:01PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote: Hi, Greg I found that Linux-3.5.5 accept this commit sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() but I think this isn't needed. Because 5167e8d5417b sched/nohz: Rewrite and fix load-avg computation -- again not fully applied is true for 3.6 branch, but not for 3.5 branch. But 5167e8d5417b is in 3.5, so shouldn't this commit still be necessary? In 3.5 branch, calc_load_exit_idle() is already called in tick_nohz_idle_exit(), it doesn't need to be called at tick_nohz_update_jiffies() again. In 3.6 branch, some code of tick_nohz_idle_exit() is splitted to tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick() and calc_load_exit_idle() is missing by accident, so commit sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() is needed. So this really should be dropped from 3.5? Charles, Peter, Ingo, any thoughts here? Bah, lots of code movement there recently.. let me try and untangle all that afresh.. /me checks out v3.5.5. OK, assuming -tick_stopped means what the label says, then we only want to call calc_load_enter_idle() when it flips to 1 and calc_load_exit_idle() when it flips back to 0, such that when an actual tick happens its got correct state. Now the actual patch 5167e8d5417b sched/nohz: Rewrite and fix load-avg computation -- again not fully applied modifies tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick() which doesn't appear to exist in v3.5.5 and the patch fobbed it into tick_nohz_update_jiffies() which is called from interrupt entry when nohz-idle so that the interrupt (and possible tailing softirq) see a valid jiffies count. However, since we don't restart the tick, we won't be sampling load muck and calling calc_load_exit_idle() from there is bound to confuse state. I hope.. damn this code ;-) I can't find wtf went wrong either, the initial patch 5167e8d5417bf5c contains both hunks, but in that case the fixup 749c8814f0 doesn't make sense, not can I find anything in merge commits using: git log -S calc_load_exit_idle kernel/time/tick-sched.c /me puzzled I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not? greg k-h -- 江苏中科梦兰电子科技有限公司 软件部 陈华才 E-mail: che...@lemote.com Web: http://www.lemote.com/ Add: 江苏省常熟市虞山镇梦兰工业园 -- 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/
Re: Seems like sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle() should be reverted in 3.5 branch
Peter Zijlstra wrote: I can't find wtf went wrong either, the initial patch 5167e8d5417bf5c contains both hunks, but in that case the fixup 749c8814f0 doesn't make sense, not can I find anything in merge commits using: git log -S calc_load_exit_idle kernel/time/tick-sched.c git log -m -p --first-parent -Scalc_load_exit_idle -- kernel/time/tick-sched.c finds 3992c0321258 (Merge branch 'timers-core-for-linus', 2012-07-22), which seems to have mismerged 2ac0d98fd624 (nohz: Make nohz API agnostic against idle ticks cputime accounting). Thanks, Jonathan -- 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/
