Hi Vincent,
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 06:11:43PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 6806c27..7a69673 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -674,9 +674,8 @@ static u64 sched_vslice(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct
> sched_entity *se)
> return calc_delta_fair(sched_slice(cfs_rq, se), se);
> }
>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> #include "pelt.h"
> -#include "sched-pelt.h"
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
>
> static int select_idle_sibling(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu, int cpu);
> static unsigned long task_h_load(struct task_struct *p);
> @@ -764,7 +763,7 @@ void post_init_entity_util_avg(struct sched_entity *se)
> * such that the next switched_to_fair() has the
> * expected state.
> */
> - se->avg.last_update_time = cfs_rq_clock_task(cfs_rq);
> + se->avg.last_update_time = cfs_rq_clock_pelt(cfs_rq);
> return;
> }
> }
> @@ -3466,7 +3465,7 @@ static void detach_entity_load_avg(struct cfs_rq
> *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *s
> /* Update task and its cfs_rq load average */
> static inline void update_load_avg(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct
> sched_entity *se, int flags)
> {
> - u64 now = cfs_rq_clock_task(cfs_rq);
> + u64 now = cfs_rq_clock_pelt(cfs_rq);
> struct rq *rq = rq_of(cfs_rq);
> int cpu = cpu_of(rq);
> int decayed;
> @@ -6694,6 +6693,12 @@ done: __maybe_unused;
> if (new_tasks > 0)
> goto again;
>
> + /*
> + * rq is about to be idle, check if we need to update the
> + * lost_idle_time of clock_pelt
> + */
> + update_idle_rq_clock_pelt(rq);
> +
> return NULL;
> }
Do you think it is better to call this from pick_next_task_idle()? I don't see
any functional difference, but it may be easier to follow.
Thanks,
Pavan
--
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux
Foundation Collaborative Project.
