Hi Ingo,
the RT patches for .22 and .23 are passing an incorrect parameter to
rebalance_domains.
I had this queued up for a few days - its still wrong in .22 and .23 RT
patches.
Same issue has been fixed in mainline by:
diff-tree de0cf899bbf06b6f64a5dce9c59d74c41b6b4232 (from
5d2b3d3695a841231b65b55
Author: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun Aug 12 18:08:19 2007 +0200
sched: run_rebalance_domains: s/SCHED_IDLE/CPU_IDLE/
rebalance_domains(SCHED_IDLE) looks strange (typo), change it to
CPU_IDLE.
the effect of this bug was slightly more agressive idle-balancing on
SMP than intended.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>
Thanks,
Sven
This parameter was missed when SCHED_IDLE was replaced by CPU_IDLE.
Fixed in mainline by:
commit de0cf899bbf06b6f64a5dce9c59d74c41b6b4232
Author: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun Aug 12 18:08:19 2007 +0200
signed-off-by: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <sven@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Index: linux-2.6.22.1-rt9-broken-out/kernel/sched.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.22.1-rt9-broken-out.orig/kernel/sched.c
+++ linux-2.6.22.1-rt9-broken-out/kernel/sched.c
@@ -3479,7 +3479,7 @@ static void run_rebalance_domains(struct
if (need_resched())
break;
- rebalance_domains(balance_cpu, SCHED_IDLE);
+ rebalance_domains(balance_cpu, CPU_IDLE);
rq = cpu_rq(balance_cpu);
if (time_after(this_rq->next_balance, rq->next_balance))
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
