linux-kernel - Re: [patch v6 10/21] sched: get rq potential maximum utilization

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: <515ADF41.8070207@intel.com>
Date:	Tue, 02 Apr 2013 21:38:09 +0800
From:	Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>
To:	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
CC:	mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, arjan@...ux.intel.com, bp@...en8.de,
	pjt@...gle.com, efault@....de, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	viresh.kumar@...aro.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch v6 10/21] sched: get rq potential maximum utilization


>> +	nr_running = rq->nr_running ? rq->nr_running : 1;
> 
> This can be cleaned up with proper min/max().

yes, thanks
> 
>> +
>> +	return rt_util + cfs_util * nr_running;
> 
> Should this nr_running consider tasks in cfs_rq only?  Also it seems
> there's no upper bound so that it can possibly exceed FULL_UTIL.

Yes.
we need to consider task number:nr_running, otherwise cpu utilization
will never beyond FULL_UTIL, then we can not know if the cpu is overload.
So we need the possible maximum utilization bigger than FULL_UTIL.
> 


-- 
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/