[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTikCe3rMcYCn52cT3nZ_i-w+Fe1rGg8UaB2ayiVS@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 13:53:11 -0700
From: Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Bharata B Rao <bharata@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Dhaval Giani <dhaval.giani@...il.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ibm.com>,
Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
Nikhil Rao <ncrao@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 04/15] sched: throttle cfs_rq entities which exceed their
local quota
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 10:09 PM, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de> wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-03-22 at 20:03 -0700, Paul Turner wrote:
>
>> +static void check_cfs_rq_quota(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
>> +{
>> + if (within_bandwidth(cfs_rq))
>> + return;
>> +
>> +
>
> Nit: It'd be nice if classes agreed on naming convention to ease
> rummaging. In rt, it's bandwidth for bean counting parameters, but the
> beans are runtime. within_bandwidth() vs sched_rt_runtime_exceeded()
> kinda pokes me in the eye when I look at the total. Seems to me it
> should be uniformly either quota or bandwidth, and uniformly runtime.
>
True enough, I'll rename to bring these more in-line with their RT equivalents
> -Mike
>
>
>
--
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