From: Dietmar Eggemann Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2017 11:29:47 +0000 (+0000) Subject: sched/fair: Explain why MIN_SHARES isn't scaled in calc_cfs_shares() X-Git-Url: http://git.lede-project.org./?a=commitdiff_plain;h=b8fd8423697b9ec729c5bb91737faad84ae19985;p=openwrt%2Fstaging%2Fblogic.git sched/fair: Explain why MIN_SHARES isn't scaled in calc_cfs_shares() Signed-off-by: Dietmar Eggemann Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Cc: Linus Torvalds Cc: Mike Galbraith Cc: Paul Turner Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Samuel Thibault Cc: Thomas Gleixner Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/e9a4d858-bcf3-36b9-e3a9-449953e34569@arm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar --- diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c index 2b866a279bdf..274c747a01ce 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c @@ -2657,6 +2657,18 @@ static long calc_cfs_shares(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct task_group *tg) if (tg_weight) shares /= tg_weight; + /* + * MIN_SHARES has to be unscaled here to support per-CPU partitioning + * of a group with small tg->shares value. It is a floor value which is + * assigned as a minimum load.weight to the sched_entity representing + * the group on a CPU. + * + * E.g. on 64-bit for a group with tg->shares of scale_load(15)=15*1024 + * on an 8-core system with 8 tasks each runnable on one CPU shares has + * to be 15*1024*1/8=1920 instead of scale_load(MIN_SHARES)=2*1024. In + * case no task is runnable on a CPU MIN_SHARES=2 should be returned + * instead of 0. + */ if (shares < MIN_SHARES) shares = MIN_SHARES; if (shares > tg->shares)