On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 10:12:31AM +0800, Yuyang Du wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 11:12:06AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> > So in the old code we had 'magic' to deal with the case where a cgroup
> > was consuming less than 1 cpu's worth of runtime. For example, a single
> > task running in the group.
> > 
> > In that scenario it might be possible that the group entity weight:
> > 
> >     se->weight = (tg->shares * cfs_rq->weight) / tg->weight;
> > 
> > Strongly deviates from the tg->shares; you want the single task reflect
> > the full group shares to the next level; due to the whole distributed
> > approximation stuff.
> 
> Yeah, I thought so.
>  
> > I see you've deleted all that code; see the former
> > __update_group_entity_contrib().
>  
> Probably not there, it actually was an icky way to adjust things.

Yeah, no argument there.

> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 4df37a4..b184da0 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -2370,7 +2370,7 @@ static inline long calc_tg_weight(struct task_group 
> *tg, struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
>        */
>       tg_weight = atomic_long_read(&tg->load_avg);
>       tg_weight -= cfs_rq->tg_load_avg_contrib;
> -     tg_weight += cfs_rq_load_avg(cfs_rq);
> +     tg_weight += cfs_rq->load.weight;
>  
>       return tg_weight;
>  }
> @@ -2380,7 +2380,7 @@ static long calc_cfs_shares(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, 
> struct task_group *tg)
>       long tg_weight, load, shares;
>  
>       tg_weight = calc_tg_weight(tg, cfs_rq);
> -     load = cfs_rq_load_avg(cfs_rq);
> +     load = cfs_rq->load.weight;
>  
>       shares = (tg->shares * load);
>       if (tg_weight)

Aah, yes very much so. I completely overlooked that :-(

When calculating shares we very much want the current load, not the load
average.

Also, should we do the below? At this point se->on_rq is still 0 so
reweight_entity() will not update (dequeue/enqueue) the accounting, but
we'll have just accounted the 'old' load.weight.

Doing it this way around we'll first update the weight and then account
it, which seems more accurate.

---
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 700eb548315f..d2efef565aed 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -3009,8 +3009,8 @@ enqueue_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity 
*se, int flags)
         */
        update_curr(cfs_rq);
        enqueue_entity_load_avg(cfs_rq, se);
-       account_entity_enqueue(cfs_rq, se);
        update_cfs_shares(cfs_rq);
+       account_entity_enqueue(cfs_rq, se);
 
        if (flags & ENQUEUE_WAKEUP) {
                place_entity(cfs_rq, se, 0);
--
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/

Reply via email to