sched: Fix the rq->next_balance logic in rebalance_domains() and idle_balance()
Currently, in idle_balance(), we update rq->next_balance when we pull_tasks. However, it is also important to update this in the !pulled_tasks case too. When the CPU is "busy" (the CPU isn't idle), rq->next_balance gets computed using sd->busy_factor (so we increase the balance interval when the CPU is busy). However, when the CPU goes idle, rq->next_balance could still be set to a large value that was computed with the sd->busy_factor. Thus, we need to also update rq->next_balance in idle_balance() in the cases where !pulled_tasks too, so that rq->next_balance gets updated without taking the busy_factor into account when the CPU is about to go idle. This patch makes rq->next_balance get updated independently of whether or not we pulled_task. Also, we add logic to ensure that we always traverse at least 1 of the sched domains to get a proper next_balance value for updating rq->next_balance. Additionally, since load_balance() modifies the sd->balance_interval, we need to re-obtain the sched domain's interval after the call to load_balance() in rebalance_domains() before we update rq->next_balance. This patch adds and uses 2 new helper functions, update_next_balance() and get_sd_balance_interval() to update next_balance and obtain the sched domain's balance_interval. Signed-off-by: NJason Low <jason.low2@hp.com> Reviewed-by: NPreeti U Murthy <preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: daniel.lezcano@linaro.org Cc: alex.shi@linaro.org Cc: efault@gmx.de Cc: vincent.guittot@linaro.org Cc: morten.rasmussen@arm.com Cc: aswin@hp.com Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1399596562.2200.7.camel@j-VirtualBoxSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Showing
想要评论请 注册 或 登录