Re: CFQ: Preemption/timeout logic reversed?

[Jens Axboe]

On Mon, Apr 20 2009, Carl Henrik Lunde wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 08:16, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 20 2009, Carl Henrik Lunde wrote:
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> It seems the preemption "bonus" logic in CFQ is reversed, a preempted
> >> process is given an additional delay in start time instead of a bonus.
> >>  This seems unfair.  I'm not sure if it's a good idea to let
> >
> > Hmm? ->slice_resid is a long, so if we preempt the process 10 jiffies
> > before it was supposed to end, the resid will be -10. So it'll not
> > increase the rb_key, it'll decrease it.
> 
> OK, so maybe I'm tired (I am!), but I don't get it. :)
> 
> {
>         if (... busy_rt_queues)
>                cfq_slice_expire(timed_out=1)
> }
> 
> cfq_slice_expire() {
> {
>         if (timed_out)
>                 slice_resid = slice_end - jiffies;
> }
> 
> if preempted it would be 100 - 90 = +10?

Hrmpf, that is buggy, it should be jiffies - slice_end! Presumably that
has been buggy since the shift to rb service tree, since (IIRC) that was
when it was changed from "add to slice length" to "adjust in tree".

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
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/