[...]

quoted

In that same discussion ISTR a suggestion about adding avg_running time,
as opposed to the current avg_runnable. The sum of avg_running should be
much more accurate, and still react correctly to migrations.

I haven't look in details but I agree that avg_running would be much
more accurate than avg_runnable and should probably fit the
requirement. Does it means that we could re-add the avg_running (or
something similar) that has disappeared during the review of load avg
tracking patchset ?

Are you referring to '[RFC PATCH 14/14] sched: implement usage tracking'
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/2/1/769 from Paul Turner?

__update_entity_runnable_avg() has an additional parameter 'running' so
that it can be called for

a) sched_entities in update_entity_load_avg():

  __update_entity_runnable_avg(..., se->on_rq, cfs_rq->curr == se))


b) rq's in update_rq_runnable_avg():

  __update_entity_runnable_avg(..., runnable, runnable);

I can see how it gives us two different signals for a sched_entity but
for a rq?

Do I miss something here?

-- Dietmar

[...]