sched: Fix load balancing performance regression in should_we_balance()
Commit 23f0d209 ("sched: Factor out code to should_we_balance()") introduces the should_we_balance() function. This function should return 1 if this cpu is appropriate for balancing. But the newly introduced code doesn't do so, it returns 0 instead of 1. This introduces performance regression, reported by Dave Chinner: v4 filesystem v5 filesystem 3.11+xfsdev: 220k files/s 225k files/s 3.12-git 180k files/s 185k files/s 3.12-git-revert 245k files/s 247k files/s You can find more detailed information at: https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/9/10/1 This patch corrects the return value of should_we_balance() function as orignally intended. With this patch, Dave Chinner reports that the regression is gone: v4 filesystem v5 filesystem 3.11+xfsdev: 220k files/s 225k files/s 3.12-git 180k files/s 185k files/s 3.12-git-revert 245k files/s 247k files/s 3.12-git-fix 249k files/s 248k files/s Reported-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com> Tested-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> Cc: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20130910065448.GA20368@lge.comSigned-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment