sched/nohz: Fix rq->cpu_load[] calculations

While investigating why the load-balancer did funny I found that the
rq->cpu_load[] tables were completely screwy.. a bit more digging
revealed that the updates that got through were missing ticks followed
by a catchup of 2 ticks.

The catchup assumes the cpu was idle during that time (since only nohz
can cause missed ticks and the machine is idle etc..) this means that
esp. the higher indices were significantly lower than they ought to
be.

The reason for this is that its not correct to compare against jiffies
on every jiffy on any other cpu than the cpu that updates jiffies.

This patch cludges around it by only doing the catch-up stuff from
nohz_idle_balance() and doing the regular stuff unconditionally from
the tick.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: pjt@google.com
Cc: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@google.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/n/tip-tp4kj18xdd5aj4vvj0qg55s2@git.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
sched/nohz: Fix rq->cpu_load calculations some more

Follow up on commit 556061b00 ("sched/nohz: Fix rq->cpu_load[]
calculations") since while that fixed the busy case it regressed the
mostly idle case.

Add a callback from the nohz exit to also age the rq->cpu_load[]
array. This closes the hole where either there was no nohz load
balance pass during the nohz, or there was a 'significant' amount of
idle time between the last nohz balance and the nohz exit.

So we'll update unconditionally from the tick to not insert any
accidental 0 load periods while busy, and we try and catch up from
nohz idle balance and nohz exit. Both these are still prone to missing
a jiffy, but that has always been the case.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: pjt@google.com
Cc: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@google.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/n/tip-kt0trz0apodbf84ucjfdbr1a@git.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
sched/nohz: Rewrite and fix load-avg computation -- again

Thanks to Charles Wang for spotting the defects in the current code:

 - If we go idle during the sample window -- after sampling, we get a
   negative bias because we can negate our own sample.

 - If we wake up during the sample window we get a positive bias
   because we push the sample to a known active period.

So rewrite the entire nohz load-avg muck once again, now adding
copious documentation to the code.

Reported-and-tested-by: Doug Smythies <dsmythies@telus.net>
Reported-and-tested-by: Charles Wang <muming.wq@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: stable@kernel.org
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1340373782.18025.74.camel@twins
[ minor edits ]
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
sched: LOAD_FREQ (4*HZ+61) avoids loadavg Moire
LOAD_FREQ is (5*HZ+1) to avoid high load average when idle:
http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-kernel/2007/10/3/328568

I suggest (4*HZ+61) for a better distribution.

With some seconds based load (like SSL heartbeats)
and LOAD_FREQ at (5*HZ+1) I see Moire patterns like inverse sawtooth,
since 2 or 3 probes hit the jobs (load increases quickly),
followed by several probes missing it.

A 4.61 sec interval gives optimal distribution over when within a
second a probe is taken, as .61 is close to golden ratio phi 1.618...
(test in http://ripke.com/goldenratio.c).

12*4.61 = 55.32 secs is still close to a minute,
and 13*4.61=59.93 is even closer than the current 12*5.01=60.12
(with exponents EXP_x adjusted to a ratio of 13 instead of 12).

Thanks to Klaus Ripke http://ripke.com/loadavg/moire
https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/11/12/39