Hello, Preeti. On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 12:18:32PM +0530, Preeti U Murthy wrote: > Hi Joonsoo, > > On 04/04/2013 06:12 AM, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > > Hello, Preeti. > > > > > So, how about extending a sched_period with rq->nr_running, instead of > > cfs_rq->nr_running? It is my quick thought and I think that we can ensure > > to run atleast once in this extending sched_period. > > Yeah this seems to be correct.This would ensure sched_min_granularity > also. So then in the scenarion where there are 2 tgs in a runqueue with > 10 tasks each,when we calculate the sched_slice of any task,the > __sched_period() would return 4*20 = 80ms. > > The sched_slice of each of the task would be 80/20 = 4ms. But what about > the sched_slice of each task group? How would that be calculated then?
Ah... Okay. I will think more deeply about this issue. > > Let us take the above example and walk through this problem.This would > probably help us spot the issues involved with this. > > > And, do we leave a problem if we cannot guaranteed atleast once property? > > This would depend on the results of the benchmarks with the changes.I am > unable to comment on this off the top of my head. Okay. :) Thanks for your kind review!! > > Thank you > > Regards > Preeti U Murthy > > > > > -- > 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/ -- 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/
