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: <5124C144.40108@intel.com>
Date:	Wed, 20 Feb 2013 20:27:48 +0800
From:	Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
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 02/20/2013 05:38 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 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.

I think you are right. At least don't need a plural utilization.
Sorry for my bad English. how about group_util here?
> 
> As a non native speaker I'm not entirely sure, but utilizations sounds
> iffy to me, is there even a plural of utilization?
> 


-- 
Thanks
    Alex
--
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/