Re: [RESEND PATCH] sched: consider missed ticks when updating global cpu load

2015-10-01 Thread Byungchul Park
ou, > > > byungchul > > > > > > ->8- > > > From 8ece9a0482e74a39cd2e9165bf8eec1d04665fa9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > > From: Byungchul Park > > > Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 17:10:10 +0900 > > > Subject: [RESEND PATCH] sched: co

Re: [RESEND PATCH] sched: consider missed ticks when updating global cpu load

2015-10-01 Thread Byungchul Park
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:43:43PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 03:14:45PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > > > when the next tick occurs, update_process_times() -> scheduler_tick() > > > -> update_cpu_load_active() is performed, assuming the distance between > > >

Re: [RESEND PATCH] sched: consider missed ticks when updating global cpu load

2015-10-01 Thread Byungchul Park
17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: Byungchul Park > > Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 17:10:10 +0900 > > Subject: [RESEND PATCH] sched: consider missed ticks when updating global > > cpu > > load > > > > in hrtimer_interrupt(), the first tick_program_event() can be fai

Re: [RESEND PATCH] sched: consider missed ticks when updating global cpu load

2015-10-01 Thread Byungchul Park
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:43:43PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 03:14:45PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > > > when the next tick occurs, update_process_times() -> scheduler_tick() > > > -> update_cpu_load_active() is performed, assuming the distance between > > >

Re: [RESEND PATCH] sched: consider missed ticks when updating global cpu load

2015-10-01 Thread Byungchul Park
> > message. > > > > > > thank you, > > > byungchul > > > > > > ->8- > > > From 8ece9a0482e74a39cd2e9165bf8eec1d04665fa9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > > From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.p...@lge.com> > > > Date: Fri,

Re: [RESEND PATCH] sched: consider missed ticks when updating global cpu load

2015-10-01 Thread Byungchul Park
65bf8eec1d04665fa9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.p...@lge.com> > > Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 17:10:10 +0900 > > Subject: [RESEND PATCH] sched: consider missed ticks when updating global > > cpu > > load > > > >

Re: [RESEND PATCH] sched: consider missed ticks when updating global cpu load

2015-09-30 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 03:14:45PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > when the next tick occurs, update_process_times() -> scheduler_tick() > > -> update_cpu_load_active() is performed, assuming the distance between > > last tick and current tick is 1 tick! it's wrong in this case. thus, > >

Re: [RESEND PATCH] sched: consider missed ticks when updating global cpu load

2015-09-30 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 03:14:45PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > when the next tick occurs, update_process_times() -> scheduler_tick() > > -> update_cpu_load_active() is performed, assuming the distance between > > last tick and current tick is 1 tick! it's wrong in this case. thus, > >

Re: [RESEND PATCH] sched: consider missed ticks when updating global cpu load

2015-09-26 Thread Frederic Weisbecker
tional commit > message. > > thank you, > byungchul > > ->8- > From 8ece9a0482e74a39cd2e9165bf8eec1d04665fa9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Byungchul Park > Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 17:10:10 +0900 > Subject: [RESEND PATCH] sched: consider missed ticks w

Re: [RESEND PATCH] sched: consider missed ticks when updating global cpu load

2015-09-26 Thread Frederic Weisbecker
ch with adding some additional commit > message. > > thank you, > byungchul > > ->8- > From 8ece9a0482e74a39cd2e9165bf8eec1d04665fa9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.p...@lge.com> > Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 17:10:10 +0900 &g

[RESEND PATCH] sched: consider missed ticks when updating global cpu load

2015-09-25 Thread byungchul.park
Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Byungchul Park Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 17:10:10 +0900 Subject: [RESEND PATCH] sched: consider missed ticks when updating global cpu load in hrtimer_interrupt(), the first tick_program_event() can be failed because the next timer could be already expired due to, (see the c

[RESEND PATCH] sched: consider missed ticks when updating global cpu load

2015-09-25 Thread byungchul.park
--- >From 8ece9a0482e74a39cd2e9165bf8eec1d04665fa9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.p...@lge.com> Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 17:10:10 +0900 Subject: [RESEND PATCH] sched: consider missed ticks when updating global cpu load in hrtimer_interrupt(), the first tick_program_event() can be failed beca