[PATCH 16/63] sched: numa: Initialise numa_next_scan properly

[Mel Gorman]

Scan delay logic and resets are currently initialised to start scanning
immediately instead of delaying properly. Initialise them properly at
fork time and catch when a new mm has been allocated.

Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxx>
---
 kernel/sched/core.c | 4 ++--
 kernel/sched/fair.c | 7 +++++++
 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index 2f3420c..681945e 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -1619,8 +1619,8 @@ static void __sched_fork(struct task_struct *p)
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA_BALANCING
 	if (p->mm && atomic_read(&p->mm->mm_users) == 1) {
-		p->mm->numa_next_scan = jiffies;
-		p->mm->numa_next_reset = jiffies;
+		p->mm->numa_next_scan = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(sysctl_numa_balancing_scan_delay);
+		p->mm->numa_next_reset = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(sysctl_numa_balancing_scan_period_reset);
 		p->mm->numa_scan_seq = 0;
 	}
 
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 148838c..22c0c7c 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -900,6 +900,13 @@ void task_numa_work(struct callback_head *work)
 	if (p->flags & PF_EXITING)
 		return;
 
+	if (!mm->numa_next_reset || !mm->numa_next_scan) {
+		mm->numa_next_scan = now +
+			msecs_to_jiffies(sysctl_numa_balancing_scan_delay);
+		mm->numa_next_reset = now +
+			msecs_to_jiffies(sysctl_numa_balancing_scan_period_reset);
+	}
+
 	/*
 	 * Reset the scan period if enough time has gone by. Objective is that
 	 * scanning will be reduced if pages are properly placed. As tasks
-- 
1.8.4

--
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/