Re: sched: Improve load balancing in the presence of idle CPUs

[Preeti U Murthy]

On 04/01/2015 12:24 AM, Jason Low wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-03-31 at 14:07 +0530, Preeti U Murthy wrote:
>> Hi Jason,
>>
>> On 03/31/2015 12:25 AM, Jason Low wrote:
>>> Hi Preeti,
>>>
>>> I noticed that another commit 4a725627f21d converted the check in
>>> nohz_kick_needed() from idle_cpu() to rq->idle_balance, causing a
>>> potentially outdated value to be used if this cpu is able to pull tasks
>>> using rebalance_domains(), and nohz_kick_needed() directly returning
>>> false.
>>
>> I see that rebalance_domains() will be run at the end of the scheduler
>> tick interrupt handling. trigger_load_balance() only sets the softirq,
>> it does not call rebalance_domains() immediately. So the call graph
>> would be:
> 
> Oh right, since that only sets the softirq, this wouldn't be the issue,
> though we would need these changes if we were to incorporate any sort of
> nohz_kick_needed() logic into the nohz_idle_balance() code path correct?

I am sorry I don't quite get this. Can you please elaborate?

Regards
Preeti U Murthy
> 

--
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/