On Wed, 13 May 2009, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 12:19 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Wed, 13 May 2009, Hugo Vincent wrote: > > > This patch resulted in a broken build for me, until I did this: > > > > > > --- a/patch-2.6.29.3-rt12 > > > +++ b/patch-2.6.29.3-rt12 > > > @@ -121754,7 +121754,7 @@ Index: linux-2.6-tip/kernel/sched.c > > > } > > > > > > /* > > > -@@ -2801,6 +3177,15 @@ static void update_cpu_load(struct rq *t > > > +@@ -2801,6 +3177,17 @@ static void update_cpu_load(struct rq *t > > > new_load += scale-1; > > > this_rq->cpu_load[i] = (old_load*(scale-1) + new_load) >> i; > > > } > > > @@ -121765,8 +121765,10 @@ Index: linux-2.6-tip/kernel/sched.c > > > + this_rq->calc_load_update += LOAD_FREQ; > > > + calc_load_account_active(this_rq); > > > + > > > ++#ifdef CONFIG_SMP > > > + if (this_rq->cpu == calc_load_cpu) > > > + calc_global_load(); > > > ++#endif > > > } > > > > Darn. the patch is halfways right. the #ifdef needs to be only around > > the if() line. Otherwise your /proc/loadavg values will never be > > updated. I'll push out -rt13 with the proper fix.. > > if (cpu_of(this_rq) == calc_load_cpu) > > to reduce if-deffery That's what I did :) -- 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
