[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1329754219.2293.357.camel@twins>
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 17:10:19 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Venki Pallipadi <venki@...gle.com>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ibm.com>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 08/14] sched: normalize tg load contributions
against runnable time
On Fri, 2012-02-17 at 04:32 -0800, Paul Turner wrote:
> > Neither the comment nor the changelog mention this, it should, it should
> > also mention why it doesn't matter (does it?).
>
> It doesn't and it should. Although I'll take the liberty shortening
> it a little to something
For the in-code comment that's fine, it would be good for the changelog
to have the entire story though.
> like "unfortunately we cannot compute
> runnable_avg(tg) directly, however, XXX is a reasonable
> approximation."
Yeah, not easily done indeed, you could compute a corrective term if
you'd have something like the avg and variance of runnable over the
various CPUs, but those too suck to have to compute.
--
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