[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <000101c71883$78e626c0$a884030a@amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2006 07:38:54 -0800
From: "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@...el.com>
To: "'Ingo Molnar'" <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: "Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
"'Andrew Morton'" <akpm@...l.org>,
"'Christoph Lameter'" <clameter@....com>,
"linux-kernel" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [-mm patch] sched remove lb_stopbalance counter
Ingo Molnar wrote on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 7:32 AM
> * Chen, Kenneth W <kenneth.w.chen@...el.com> wrote:
> > in -mm tree: I would like to revert the change on adding
> > lb_stopbalance counter. This count can be calculated by: lb_balanced
> > - lb_nobusyg - lb_nobusyq. There is no need to create gazillion
> > counters while we can derive the value. I'm more of against changing
> > sched-stat format unless it is absolutely necessary as all user land
> > tool parsing /proc/schedstat needs to be updated and it's a real pain
> > trying to keep multiple versions of it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ken Chen <kenneth.w.chen@...el.com>
>
> Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
>
> but, please:
>
> > -#define SCHEDSTAT_VERSION 13
> > +#define SCHEDSTAT_VERSION 12
>
> change this to 14 instead. Versions should only go upwards, even if we
> revert to an earlier output format.
Really? sched-decrease-number-of-load-balances.patch has not yet hit the
mainline and I think it's in -mm for only a couple of weeks. I'm trying
to back out the change after brief reviewing the patch.
- Ken
-
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