LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Rearrange select_task_rq_fair() to optimize it
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 15:43:13 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180425101313.zwxg7gz2ybnvlvtn@vireshk-i7> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180425093909.GI14391@e108498-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
On 25-04-18, 10:39, Quentin Perret wrote:
> On Wednesday 25 Apr 2018 at 14:33:27 (+0530), Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 25-04-18, 09:13, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > > While you're at it, you could probably remove the one in wake_cap() ? I
> > > think having just one in select_task_rq_fair() should be enough.
> >
> > Just make it clear, you are asking me to remove sync_entity_load_avg()
> > in wake_cap() ? But aren't we required to do that, as in the very next
> > line we call task_util(p) ?
>
> Right, we do need to call sync_entity_load_avg() at some point before
> calling task_util(), but we don't need to re-call it in strf()
> after in this case. So my point was just that if you want to re-work
> the wake-up path and make sure we don't call sync_entity_load_avg()
> if not needed then this might need fixing as well ... Or maybe we don't
> care since re-calling sync_entity_load_avg() should be really cheap ...
These are in two very different paths and I am not sure of a clean way
to avoid calling sync_entity_load_avg() again. Maybe will leave it as
is for now.
--
viresh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-25 10:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-23 10:38 Viresh Kumar
2018-04-24 10:02 ` Valentin Schneider
2018-04-24 10:30 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-04-24 10:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-24 11:19 ` Valentin Schneider
2018-04-24 12:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-24 15:46 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-04-24 15:47 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-04-24 22:34 ` Rohit Jain
2018-04-25 2:51 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-04-25 16:48 ` Rohit Jain
2018-04-25 5:15 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-04-25 8:13 ` Quentin Perret
2018-04-25 9:03 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-04-25 9:39 ` Quentin Perret
2018-04-25 10:13 ` Viresh Kumar [this message]
2018-04-25 10:55 ` Quentin Perret
2018-04-25 8:12 ` Quentin Perret
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180425101313.zwxg7gz2ybnvlvtn@vireshk-i7 \
--to=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=quentin.perret@arm.com \
--cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--subject='Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Rearrange select_task_rq_fair() to optimize it' \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).