Re: bug in sched.c:activate_task()

[Nick Piggin]

Con Kolivas wrote:
> Ingo Molnar writes:
>
> > On Tue, 5 Oct 2004, Con Kolivas wrote:
> >
> > >     unsigned long long delta = now - next->timestamp;
> > >
> > >     if (next->activated == 1)
> > >         delta = delta * (ON_RUNQUEUE_WEIGHT * 128 / 100) / 128;
> > >
> > > is in schedule() before we update the timestamp, no?
> >
> >
> > indeed ... so the patch is just random incorrect damage that happened to
> > distrub the scheduler fixing some balancing problem. Kenneth, what
> > precisely is the balancing problem you are seeing?
>
>
> We used to compare jiffy difference in can_migrate_task by comparing it to
> cache_decay_ticks. Somewhere in the merging of sched_domains it was 
> changed to task_hot which uses timestamp.

It always used ->timestamp though, even when that was in jiffies.
sched domains didn't change anything there (and IIRC it used
task_hot before sched domains).
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/