-
Byungchul Park authored
There are some cases where distance between ticks is more than one tick while the CPU is not idle, e.g. full NOHZ. However __update_cpu_load() assumes it is the idle tickless case if the distance between ticks is more than 1, even though it can be the active tickless case as well. Thus in the active tickless case, updating the CPU load will not be performed correctly. Where the current code assumes the load for each tick is zero, this is (obviously) not true in non-idle tickless case. We can approximately consider the load ~= this_rq->cpu_load[0] during tickless in non-idle tickless case. Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1444816056-11886-2-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.comSigned-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
59543275