lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue, 12 Jun 2007 07:59:22 +0530
From:	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
	efault@....de, kernel@...ivas.org, containers@...ts.osdl.org,
	ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, pwil3058@...pond.net.au,
	tingy@...umass.edu, tong.n.li@...el.com, wli@...omorphy.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dmitry.adamushko@...il.com,
	balbir@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/6] core changes in CFS

Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> +#define entity_is_task(se)	1

Could you add some comments as to what this means? Should be it boolean instead
(true)


>  /*
> - * Enqueue a task into the rb-tree:
> + * Enqueue a entity into the rb-tree:

Enqueue an entity

> -static void limit_wait_runtime(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
> +static void limit_wait_runtime(struct lrq *lrq, struct sched_entity *p)

p is a general convention for tasks in the code, could we use something
different -- may be "e"?

> 
>  static s64 div64_s(s64 divident, unsigned long divisor)
> @@ -183,49 +219,51 @@
>   * Update the current task's runtime statistics. Skip current tasks that
>   * are not in our scheduling class.
>   */
> -static inline void update_curr(struct rq *rq, u64 now)
> +static inline void update_curr(struct lrq *lrq, u64 now)
>  {
> -	unsigned long load = rq->lrq.raw_weighted_load;
> +	unsigned long load = lrq->raw_weighted_load;
>  	u64 delta_exec, delta_fair, delta_mine;
> -	struct task_struct *curr = rq->curr;
> +	struct sched_entity *curr = lrq_curr(lrq);

How about curr_entity?

> +	struct rq *rq = lrq_rq(lrq);
> +	struct task_struct *curtask = rq->curr;
> 
> -	if (curr->sched_class != &fair_sched_class || curr == rq->idle || !load)
> +	if (!curr || curtask == rq->idle || !load)

Can !curr ever be true? shoudn't we look into the sched_class of the task
that the entity belongs to?


-- 
	Warm Regards,
	Balbir Singh
	Linux Technology Center
	IBM, ISTL
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ