On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 09:29:15AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 09:05:45AM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote: > > On 22 December 2017 at 08:59, Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 05:56:32PM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote: > > >> In fact, we can't only rely on the tick and newly_idle load balance to > > >> ensure a period update of the blocked load because they can never > > >> happen. > > > > > > I'm confused, why would the ilb not happen? > > > > the ilb will be kick only if tick fires which might not be the case > > for task that runs less than a tick > > Oh, urgh, you're talking about when the entire system is idle. Yes > indeed. > > Lemme have a think, surely we can do something saner there.
The only thing I could come up with is running a timer for this :/ That would keep the ILB thing running until all load is decayed (have a patch for that somewhere).
