linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 2/7] sched: remove SMP cover for runnable variables in cfs

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: <5187C616.4070503@intel.com>
Date:	Mon, 06 May 2013 23:02:46 +0800
From:	Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>
To:	Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
	Preeti U Murthy <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Michael Wang <wangyun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/7] sched: remove SMP cover for runnable variables
 in cfs_rq

On 05/06/2013 05:08 PM, Paul Turner wrote:
> On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 1:57 AM, Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com> wrote:
>> On 05/06/2013 04:01 PM, Paul Turner wrote:
>>> On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 6:45 PM, Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com> wrote:
>>>> The following variables were covered under CONFIG_SMP in struct cfs_rq.
>>>> but similar runnable variables work for UP in struct rq and task_group.
>>>> like rq->avg, task_group->load_avg.
>>>> So move them out, they also can work with UP.
>>>
>>> Is there a proposed use-case for UP?  My apologies if I missed it in
>>> an alternate patch.
>>
>>> It would seem the only possibly useful thing there would the the
>>> per-rq average for p-state selection; but we can get that without the
>>> per-entity values already.
>>
>>
>> Do you mean to move the rq->avg and task_group->load_avg into CONFIG_SMP?
> 
> More generally:  Why do we need them in !CONFIG_SMP?
> 
> [ I was suggesting (potentially) using only rq->avg in the !CONFIG_SMP case. ]

Thanks for comments.
I will look into this. :)
> 
> 
>>
>> --
>> Thanks
>>     Alex


-- 
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/