On Thu, 27 May 2021 at 11:46, Odin Ugedal <odin@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > > > I finally got it this morning with your script and I confirm that the > > problem of load_sum == 0 but load_avg != 0 comes from > > update_tg_cfs_load(). Then, it seems that we don't call > > update_tg_load_avg for this cfs_rq in __update_blocked_fair() because > > of a recent update while propagating child's load changes. At the end > > we remove the cfs_rq from the list without updating its contribution. > > > > I'm going to prepare a patch to fix this > > Yeah, that is another way to look at it. Have not verified, but > wouldn't update_tg_load_avg() in this case > just remove the diff (load_avg - tg_load_avg_contrib)? Wouldn't we > still see some tg_load_avg_contrib > after the cfs_rq is removed from the list then? Eg. in my example > above, the cfs_rq will be removed from > the list while tg_load_avg_contrib=2, or am I missing something? That > was my thought when I looked > at it last week at least.. 1st : ensure that cfs_rq->load_sum is not null if cfs_rq-> load_isn't too 2nd : call update_tg_load_avg() during child update so we will be sure to update tg_load_avg_contrib before removing the cfs from the list > > Thanks > Odin
