/arch/arm/mach-orion5x/

is confusion happens to be a problem with CPU load updates: cpu_load_update_active() doesn't handle nohz ticks correctly because it assumes that ticks are completely stopped in nohz mode and that cpu_load_update_active() can't be called in dynticks mode. When that happens, the whole previous tickless load is ignored and the function just records the load for the current tick, ignoring potentially long idle periods behind. In order to solve this, we could account the current load for the previous nohz time but there is a risk that we account the load of a task that got freshly enqueued for the whole nohz period. So instead, lets record the dynticks load on nohz frame entry so we know what to record in case of nohz ticks, then use this record to account the tickless load on nohz ticks and nohz frame end. Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com> Cc: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@ezchip.com> Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com> Cc: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com> Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> Cc: Paul E . McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1460555812-25375-3-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Diffstat