On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 at 10:38, Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggem...@arm.com> wrote: > > On 10/31/18 10:18 AM, Vincent Guittot wrote: > > Hi Dietmar, > > > > On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 at 08:20, Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggem...@arm.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> On 10/26/18 6:11 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote: > >> > >> [...] > >> > >>> 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; > >>> } > >>> } > >> > >> There is this 1/cpu scaling of se->avg.util_sum (running_sum) in > >> update_tg_cfs_runnable() so it can be used to calculate > >> se->avg.runnable_load_sum (runnable_sum). I guess with your approach > >> this should be removed. > > > > Yes good catch > > Another thing, since you do not need the cpu parameter in > accumulate_sum() anymore, you could also get rid of it in > ___update_load_sum() and further in __update_load_avg_blocked_se(), > __update_load_avg_cfs_rq() and __update_load_avg_se().
yes, I have to clean interface from reference to cpu > > Nitpick: The function header of update_cfs_rq_load_avg() mentions '@now: > current time, as per cfs_rq_clock_task()' ... should mention > cfs_rq_clock_pelt() instead. ok > > [...]
