Re: [PATCH v3] sched/core: Skip rq->avg_idle update without a valid idle_stamp

Shubhang <[email protected]>
Newsgroups org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hello all,

Gentle ping for v3. I repeated the Hackbench comparison with multiple runs 
per kernel. The reported thread and process cases stayed within about 1.5% 
mean delta, with similar baseline run-to-run variation.

Please let me know if there are further concerns with this approach.

Thanks,
Shubhang Kaushik

On Fri, 7 Aug 2026, Shubhang Kaushik (Ampere) wrote:

> Fixes: 4b603f1551a73 ("sched: Update rq->avg_idle when a task is moved to an idle CPU")
> Reviewed-by: K Prateek Nayak <[email protected]>
> Acked-by: John Stultz <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Shubhang Kaushik (Ampere) <[email protected]>
> ---
> Temporary tracing under hackbench load confirmed that
> update_rq_avg_idle() can be reached with rq->idle_stamp == 0.
> Hackbench showed no material regression versus v7.2-rc5 mainline.
>
> Related discussion:
>  https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
>
> This is a narrower variant of the earlier proposal. It keeps the
> rq->idle_stamp guard in update_rq_avg_idle(), but intentionally does not
> stamp idle entry from set_next_task_idle(), preserving the existing
> newidle accounting model and avoiding force-idle/proxy-exec accounting
> concerns.
> ---
> Changes in v3:
>  - Describe the sched_balance_newidle()/ttwu_pending path as an
>    example of entering idle without a valid rq->idle_stamp.
>  - Drop unlikely() from the idle_stamp check.
>  - Add Acked-by from John Stultz.
>
> Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.