On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 03:24:05PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 02:10:02PM +0100, Brendan Jackman wrote:
> > We use task_util in find_idlest_group via capacity_spare_wake. This
> > task_util is updated in wake_cap. However wake_cap is not the only
> > reason for ending up
On Wed, Aug 02 2017 at 13:24, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 02:10:02PM +0100, Brendan Jackman wrote:
>> We use task_util in find_idlest_group via capacity_spare_wake. This
>> task_util is updated in wake_cap. However wake_cap is not the only
>> reason for ending up in find_idlest
On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 02:10:02PM +0100, Brendan Jackman wrote:
> We use task_util in find_idlest_group via capacity_spare_wake. This
> task_util is updated in wake_cap. However wake_cap is not the only
> reason for ending up in find_idlest_group - we could have been sent
> there by wake_wide. So
We use task_util in find_idlest_group via capacity_spare_wake. This
task_util is updated in wake_cap. However wake_cap is not the only
reason for ending up in find_idlest_group - we could have been sent
there by wake_wide. So explicitly sync the task util with prev_cpu
when we are about to head to
4 matches
Mail list logo