From b0cff9d88ce2f3030f73138078c5b1019f17e1cc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Joonsoo Kim Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 15:54:49 +0900 Subject: [PATCH] sched: Fix load balancing performance regression in should_we_balance() Commit 23f0d20 ("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 Tested-by: Dave Chinner Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim Cc: Paul Turner Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Dave Chinner Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20130910065448.GA20368@lge.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar --- kernel/sched/fair.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c index 7f0a5e6cdae0..9b3fe1cd8f40 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c @@ -5151,7 +5151,7 @@ static int should_we_balance(struct lb_env *env) * First idle cpu or the first cpu(busiest) in this sched group * is eligible for doing load balancing at this and above domains. */ - return balance_cpu != env->dst_cpu; + return balance_cpu == env->dst_cpu; } /* -- 2.20.1