On 22 May 2013 17:56, Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmus...@arm.com> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 11:00:58AM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote: >> Part of this patch is missing, the fix below is needed >> >> @@ -3497,7 +3497,9 @@ static bool is_buddy_full(int cpu) >> static bool is_my_buddy(int cpu, int buddy) >> { >> int my_buddy = per_cpu(sd_pack_buddy, cpu); >> - return (my_buddy == -1) || (buddy == my_buddy); >> + >> + return ((sysctl_sched_packing_mode == SCHED_PACKING_FULL) && >> + ((my_buddy == -1) || (buddy == my_buddy))); >> } >> >> static bool is_light_task(struct task_struct *p) >> >> >> On 25 April 2013 19:23, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guit...@linaro.org> wrote: >> > Only CPUs that participates to the packing effort can pull tasks on a >> > busiest >> > group. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guit...@linaro.org> >> > --- >> > kernel/sched/fair.c | 14 ++++++++++++-- >> > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> > >> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c >> > index 28f8ea7..6f63fb9 100644 >> > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c >> > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c >> > @@ -3494,6 +3494,12 @@ static bool is_buddy_full(int cpu) >> > return (sum * 1024 >= period * 1000); >> > } >> > >> > +static bool is_my_buddy(int cpu, int buddy) >> > +{ >> > + int my_buddy = per_cpu(sd_pack_buddy, cpu); >> > + return (my_buddy == -1) || (buddy == my_buddy); >> > +} > > Would it make sense to change the function name to something like > is_packing_target() and only have one argument?
I have replaced it with is_packing_cpu(int cpu) in my next version. This function returns true if the cpu is part of the packing effort > > is_my_buddy() is only used with the same variable for both arguments > like below. > >> > + >> > static bool is_light_task(struct task_struct *p) >> > { >> > /* A light task runs less than 20% in average */ >> > @@ -4688,8 +4694,8 @@ static inline void update_sg_lb_stats(struct lb_env >> > *env, >> > >> > /* Bias balancing toward cpus of our domain */ >> > if (local_group) { >> > - if (idle_cpu(i) && !first_idle_cpu && >> > - cpumask_test_cpu(i, >> > sched_group_mask(group))) { >> > + if (is_my_buddy(i, i) && idle_cpu(i) && >> > !first_idle_cpu >> > + && cpumask_test_cpu(i, sched_group_mask(group))) { >> > first_idle_cpu = 1; >> > balance_cpu = i; >> > } >> > @@ -4817,6 +4823,10 @@ static void update_plb_buddy(int cpu, int *balance, >> > struct sd_lb_stats *sds, >> > >> > /* Get my new buddy */ >> > buddy = per_cpu(sd_pack_buddy, cpu); >> > + >> > + /* This CPU doesn't act for agressive packing */ >> > + if (buddy != cpu) >> > + sds->busiest = 0; > > sds->busiest is a pointer, so I think it should be assigned to NULL > instead of 0. yes Thanks Vincent > > Morten > >> > } >> > >> > /** >> > -- >> > 1.7.9.5 >> > >> > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/