[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140911111736.GV3190@worktop.ger.corp.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 13:17:36 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linux@....linux.org.uk,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, riel@...hat.com,
Morten.Rasmussen@....com, efault@....de, nicolas.pitre@...aro.org,
linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org, daniel.lezcano@...aro.org,
dietmar.eggemann@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 09/12] sched: add usage_load_avg
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 01:06:52PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> index 5c2c885..7dfd584 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -1073,10 +1073,10 @@ struct sched_avg {
> * above by 1024/(1-y). Thus we only need a u32 to store them for all
> * choices of y < 1-2^(-32)*1024.
> */
> - u32 runnable_avg_sum, runnable_avg_period;
> + u32 runnable_avg_sum, runnable_avg_period, running_avg_sum;
Seeing how we use runnable_avg_period for both runnable and running,
does it make sense to remove the runnable part of it from the name?
Also, 4 byte hole here, not sure we've got anything useful to stuff in
it though.
> u64 last_runnable_update;
> s64 decay_count;
> - unsigned long load_avg_contrib;
> + unsigned long load_avg_contrib, usage_avg_contrib;
> };
>
Man, I should go look at Yuyang's rewrite of this all again. I just
tried to figure out the decay stuff and my head hurts ;-)
--
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