linux-kernel - Re: [patch v5 07/15] sched: add new sg/sd_lb_stats fields for incoming fork/exec/wake balancing

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]

Message-ID: <1361353109.10155.7.camel@laptop>
Date:	Wed, 20 Feb 2013 10:38:29 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>
Cc:	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, mingo@...hat.com,
	tglx@...utronix.de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	arjan@...ux.intel.com, bp@...en8.de, pjt@...gle.com,
	namhyung@...nel.org, efault@....de, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	viresh.kumar@...aro.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	morten.rasmussen@....com
Subject: Re: [patch v5 07/15] sched: add new sg/sd_lb_stats fields for
 incoming fork/exec/wake balancing

On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 13:07 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
> @@ -4214,6 +4214,11 @@ struct sd_lb_stats {
>         unsigned int  busiest_group_weight;
>  
>         int group_imb; /* Is there imbalance in this sd */
> +
> +       /* Varibles of power awaring scheduling */
> +       unsigned int  sd_utils; /* sum utilizations of this domain */
> +       unsigned long sd_capacity;      /* capacity of this domain */
> +       struct sched_group *group_leader; /* Group which relieves
> group_min */
>  };
>  
>  /*
> @@ -4229,6 +4234,7 @@ struct sg_lb_stats {
>         unsigned long group_weight;
>         int group_imb; /* Is there an imbalance in the group ? */
>         int group_has_capacity; /* Is there extra capacity in the
> group? */
> +       unsigned int group_utils;       /* sum utilizations of group
> */
>  };

So I have two problems with the _utils name, firstly its a single value
and therefore we shouldn't give it a name in plural, secondly, whenever
I read utils I read utilities, not utilizations.

As a non native speaker I'm not entirely sure, but utilizations sounds
iffy to me, is there even a plural of utilization?

--
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/