On Tue, 2014-03-18 at 09:56 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 05:06:26AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > > +static void __cpuinit set_cpu_rq_start_time(void)
> > > +{
> > > + int cpu = smp_processor_id();
> > > + struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
> > > + rq->age_stamp = sched_clock_cpu(cpu);
> > > +}
> >
> > rq->age_stamp must lag rq->clock. See scale_rt_power(), and what
> > happens when it munches magic timewarp mushrooms.
> >
> > > +
> > > static int sched_cpu_active(struct notifier_block *nfb,
> > > unsigned long action, void *hcpu)
> > > {
> > > switch (action & ~CPU_TASKS_FROZEN) {
> > > case CPU_STARTING:
> > > + set_cpu_rq_start_time();
> > > + /* fall through */
> > > case CPU_DOWN_FAILED:
> > > set_cpu_active((long)hcpu, true);
> > > return NOTIFY_OK;
> > > @@ -6922,6 +6931,7 @@ void __init sched_init(void)
> > > init_sched_fair_class();
> > >
> > > scheduler_running = 1;
> > > + set_cpu_rq_start_time();
>
> I would put it one line up; that scheduler_running=1 is the last thing
> we should do.
And set clock and age, dazed scale_rt_power() is butt ugly.
-Mike
--
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/
