On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 07:24:17PM +0100, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -7569,6 +7569,13 @@ static int need_active_balance(struct lb_env *env)
> return 1;
> }
>
> + if ((capacity_of(env->src_cpu) < capacity_of(env->dst_cpu)) &&
> + env->src_rq->cfs.h_nr_running == 1 &&
> + cpu_overutilized(env->src_cpu) &&
> + !cpu_overutilized(env->dst_cpu)) {
> + return 1;
> + }
> +
> return unlikely(sd->nr_balance_failed > sd->cache_nice_tries+2);
> }
Doesn't this allow for a nice game of ping-pong? Where if a task runs on
CPU X and generates interrupts there, its capacity will lower and we'll
migrate it over to CPU Y because that isn't receiving interrupts.
Now the task is running on Y, will generate interrupts there, and sees X
as a more attractive destination.
goto 1
--
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/
