On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 06:17:49PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> even in this case, as i already said, place_entity() should be performed
> after restoring a normalized value to the meaningful original value.
> IMHO, it is wrong that se->vruntime is assigned with a bonused value
>
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 06:48:43AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> On 9/7/15 10:02 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >Please always Cc at least the person who wrote the lines you modify.
> >
> >On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 05:45:20PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >>The sleeper task will be normalized when moved from
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 04:45:46PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> On 9/8/15 4:38 PM, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >On 9/8/15 4:22 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
> >>On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 04:04:49PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >However, if se->vruntime -= cfs_rq->min_vruntime is positive, the
> >behavior is
> -Original Message-
> From: Wanpeng Li [mailto:wanpeng...@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2015 5:46 PM
> To: Byungchul Park
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra; Ingo Molnar; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
> yuyang...@intel.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: fix lo
> -Original Message-
> From: Wanpeng Li [mailto:wanpeng...@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2015 5:39 PM
> To: Byungchul Park
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra; Ingo Molnar; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
> yuyang...@intel.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: fix lo
On 9/8/15 4:38 PM, Wanpeng Li wrote:
On 9/8/15 4:22 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 04:04:49PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
However, if se->vruntime -= cfs_rq->min_vruntime is positive, the
behavior is different after your patch. e.g. se->vruntime(the
relative vruntime in
On 9/8/15 4:22 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 04:04:49PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
However, if se->vruntime -= cfs_rq->min_vruntime is positive, the
behavior is different after your patch. e.g. se->vruntime(the
relative vruntime in switched_to_fair()) < min_vruntime -
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 04:04:49PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >>However, if se->vruntime -= cfs_rq->min_vruntime is positive, the
> >>behavior is different after your patch. e.g. se->vruntime(the
> >>relative vruntime in switched_to_fair()) < min_vruntime -
> >>sysctl_sched_latency/2
> >>
>
On 9/8/15 3:57 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 03:30:08PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
On 9/8/15 3:11 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 02:42:52PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
On 9/8/15 2:32 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 03:14:26PM +0900,
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 03:30:08PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> On 9/8/15 3:11 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
> >On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 02:42:52PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >>On 9/8/15 2:32 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
> >>>On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 03:14:26PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> On Tue, Sep
On 9/8/15 3:11 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 02:42:52PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
On 9/8/15 2:32 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 03:14:26PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 01:38:08PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
On 9/8/15 1:28 PM,
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 02:42:52PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> On 9/8/15 2:32 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
> >On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 03:14:26PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> >>On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 01:38:08PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >>>On 9/8/15 1:28 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
> On Tue, Sep
On 9/8/15 10:10 AM, Byungchul Park wrote:
hello wanpeng,
On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 05:45:20PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
The sleeper task will be normalized when moved from fair_sched_class, in
order that vruntime will be adjusted either the task is running or sleeping
when moved back. The
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 02:23:56PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> On 9/8/15 2:14 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
> >On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 01:38:08PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >>On 9/8/15 1:28 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
> >>>On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 11:46:01AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> On 9/7/15 10:02
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 02:28:17PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 11:46:01AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> > On 9/7/15 10:02 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > >Please always Cc at least the person who wrote the lines you modify.
> > >
> > >On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 05:45:20PM +0800,
On 9/8/15 2:32 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 03:14:26PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 01:38:08PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
On 9/8/15 1:28 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 11:46:01AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
On 9/7/15 10:02 PM, Peter
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 03:14:26PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 01:38:08PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> > On 9/8/15 1:28 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
> > >On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 11:46:01AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> > >>On 9/7/15 10:02 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > >>>Please
On 9/8/15 2:14 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 01:38:08PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
On 9/8/15 1:28 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 11:46:01AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
On 9/7/15 10:02 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Please always Cc at least the person who wrote
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 01:38:08PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> On 9/8/15 1:28 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
> >On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 11:46:01AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >>On 9/7/15 10:02 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >>>Please always Cc at least the person who wrote the lines you modify.
> >>>
>
On 9/8/15 10:10 AM, Byungchul Park wrote:
hello wanpeng,
On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 05:45:20PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
The sleeper task will be normalized when moved from fair_sched_class, in
order that vruntime will be adjusted either the task is running or sleeping
when moved back. The
On 9/8/15 4:22 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 04:04:49PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
However, if se->vruntime -= cfs_rq->min_vruntime is positive, the
behavior is different after your patch. e.g. se->vruntime(the
relative vruntime in switched_to_fair()) < min_vruntime -
On 9/8/15 4:38 PM, Wanpeng Li wrote:
On 9/8/15 4:22 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 04:04:49PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
However, if se->vruntime -= cfs_rq->min_vruntime is positive, the
behavior is different after your patch. e.g. se->vruntime(the
relative vruntime in
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 01:38:08PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> On 9/8/15 1:28 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
> >On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 11:46:01AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >>On 9/7/15 10:02 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >>>Please always Cc at least the person who wrote the lines you modify.
> >>>
>
On 9/8/15 3:11 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 02:42:52PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
On 9/8/15 2:32 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 03:14:26PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 01:38:08PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
On 9/8/15 1:28 PM,
On 9/8/15 3:57 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 03:30:08PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
On 9/8/15 3:11 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 02:42:52PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
On 9/8/15 2:32 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 03:14:26PM +0900,
> -Original Message-
> From: Wanpeng Li [mailto:wanpeng...@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2015 5:46 PM
> To: Byungchul Park
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra; Ingo Molnar; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
> yuyang...@intel.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: fix lo
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 03:30:08PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> On 9/8/15 3:11 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
> >On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 02:42:52PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >>On 9/8/15 2:32 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
> >>>On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 03:14:26PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> On Tue, Sep
On 9/8/15 2:14 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 01:38:08PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
On 9/8/15 1:28 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 11:46:01AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
On 9/7/15 10:02 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Please always Cc at least the person who wrote
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 03:14:26PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 01:38:08PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> > On 9/8/15 1:28 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
> > >On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 11:46:01AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> > >>On 9/7/15 10:02 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > >>>Please
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 04:04:49PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >>However, if se->vruntime -= cfs_rq->min_vruntime is positive, the
> >>behavior is different after your patch. e.g. se->vruntime(the
> >>relative vruntime in switched_to_fair()) < min_vruntime -
> >>sysctl_sched_latency/2
> >>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wanpeng Li [mailto:wanpeng...@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2015 5:39 PM
> To: Byungchul Park
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra; Ingo Molnar; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
> yuyang...@intel.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: fix lo
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 02:28:17PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 11:46:01AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> > On 9/7/15 10:02 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > >Please always Cc at least the person who wrote the lines you modify.
> > >
> > >On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 05:45:20PM +0800,
On 9/8/15 2:32 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 03:14:26PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 01:38:08PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
On 9/8/15 1:28 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 11:46:01AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
On 9/7/15 10:02 PM, Peter
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 02:42:52PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> On 9/8/15 2:32 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
> >On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 03:14:26PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> >>On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 01:38:08PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >>>On 9/8/15 1:28 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
> On Tue, Sep
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 02:23:56PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> On 9/8/15 2:14 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
> >On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 01:38:08PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >>On 9/8/15 1:28 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
> >>>On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 11:46:01AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> On 9/7/15 10:02
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 04:45:46PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> On 9/8/15 4:38 PM, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >On 9/8/15 4:22 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
> >>On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 04:04:49PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >However, if se->vruntime -= cfs_rq->min_vruntime is positive, the
> >behavior is
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 06:48:43AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> On 9/7/15 10:02 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >Please always Cc at least the person who wrote the lines you modify.
> >
> >On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 05:45:20PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >>The sleeper task will be normalized when moved from
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 06:17:49PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> even in this case, as i already said, place_entity() should be performed
> after restoring a normalized value to the meaningful original value.
> IMHO, it is wrong that se->vruntime is assigned with a bonused value
>
On 9/8/15 1:28 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 11:46:01AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
On 9/7/15 10:02 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Please always Cc at least the person who wrote the lines you modify.
On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 05:45:20PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
The sleeper task
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 11:46:01AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> On 9/7/15 10:02 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >Please always Cc at least the person who wrote the lines you modify.
> >
> >On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 05:45:20PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >>The sleeper task will be normalized when moved from
On 9/7/15 10:02 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Please always Cc at least the person who wrote the lines you modify.
On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 05:45:20PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
The sleeper task will be normalized when moved from fair_sched_class, in
order that vruntime will be adjusted either the
hello wanpeng,
On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 05:45:20PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> The sleeper task will be normalized when moved from fair_sched_class, in
> order that vruntime will be adjusted either the task is running or sleeping
> when moved back. The nomalization in switch_to_fair for sleep
Please always Cc at least the person who wrote the lines you modify.
On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 05:45:20PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> The sleeper task will be normalized when moved from fair_sched_class, in
> order that vruntime will be adjusted either the task is running or sleeping
> when moved
The sleeper task will be normalized when moved from fair_sched_class, in
order that vruntime will be adjusted either the task is running or sleeping
when moved back. The nomalization in switch_to_fair for sleep task will
result in lose fair sleeper bonus in place_entity() once the vruntime -
The sleeper task will be normalized when moved from fair_sched_class, in
order that vruntime will be adjusted either the task is running or sleeping
when moved back. The nomalization in switch_to_fair for sleep task will
result in lose fair sleeper bonus in place_entity() once the vruntime -
Please always Cc at least the person who wrote the lines you modify.
On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 05:45:20PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> The sleeper task will be normalized when moved from fair_sched_class, in
> order that vruntime will be adjusted either the task is running or sleeping
> when moved
On 9/7/15 10:02 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Please always Cc at least the person who wrote the lines you modify.
On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 05:45:20PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
The sleeper task will be normalized when moved from fair_sched_class, in
order that vruntime will be adjusted either the
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 11:46:01AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> On 9/7/15 10:02 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >Please always Cc at least the person who wrote the lines you modify.
> >
> >On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 05:45:20PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >>The sleeper task will be normalized when moved from
On 9/8/15 1:28 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 11:46:01AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
On 9/7/15 10:02 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Please always Cc at least the person who wrote the lines you modify.
On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 05:45:20PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
The sleeper task
hello wanpeng,
On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 05:45:20PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> The sleeper task will be normalized when moved from fair_sched_class, in
> order that vruntime will be adjusted either the task is running or sleeping
> when moved back. The nomalization in switch_to_fair for sleep
50 matches
Mail list logo
