lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Apr]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/5] sched: don't consider upper se in sched_slice()
Hello, Preeti.

On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 12:18:32PM +0530, Preeti U Murthy wrote:
> Hi Joonsoo,
>
> On 04/04/2013 06:12 AM, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> > Hello, Preeti.
>
> >
> > So, how about extending a sched_period with rq->nr_running, instead of
> > cfs_rq->nr_running? It is my quick thought and I think that we can ensure
> > to run atleast once in this extending sched_period.
>
> Yeah this seems to be correct.This would ensure sched_min_granularity
> also. So then in the scenarion where there are 2 tgs in a runqueue with
> 10 tasks each,when we calculate the sched_slice of any task,the
> __sched_period() would return 4*20 = 80ms.
>
> The sched_slice of each of the task would be 80/20 = 4ms. But what about
> the sched_slice of each task group? How would that be calculated then?

Ah... Okay.
I will think more deeply about this issue.

>
> Let us take the above example and walk through this problem.This would
> probably help us spot the issues involved with this.
>
> > And, do we leave a problem if we cannot guaranteed atleast once property?
>
> This would depend on the results of the benchmarks with the changes.I am
> unable to comment on this off the top of my head.

Okay. :)

Thanks for your kind review!!

>
> Thank you
>
> Regards
> Preeti U Murthy
>
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-04-05 05:01    [W:0.045 / U:1.376 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site