[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150908141015.GJ3644@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 16:10:15 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@...aro.org>,
Morten Rasmussen <Morten.Rasmussen@....com>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"daniel.lezcano@...aro.org" <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
"yuyang.du@...el.com" <yuyang.du@...el.com>,
"mturquette@...libre.com" <mturquette@...libre.com>,
"rjw@...ysocki.net" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Juri Lelli <Juri.Lelli@....com>,
"sgurrappadi@...dia.com" <sgurrappadi@...dia.com>,
"pang.xunlei@....com.cn" <pang.xunlei@....com.cn>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] sched/fair: Get rid of scaling utilization by
capacity_orig
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 03:39:37PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > Now, given all that, units are a complete mess here, and I'd not mind
> > something like:
> >
> > #if (SCHED_LOAD_SHIFT - SCHED_LOAD_RESOLUTION) != SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT
> > #error "something usefull"
> > #endif
>
> In this case why not simply doing
> #define SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT SCHED_LOAD_SHIFT
> or the opposite ?
Sadly not enough; aside from the fact that we really should do !0
LOAD_RESOLUTION on 64bit, the whole magic tables (runnable_avg_yN_*[])
and LOAD_AVG_MAX* values rely on the unit being 1<<10.
So regardless of defining one in terms of the other, we should check
both are in fact 10 and error out otherwise.
Changing them must involve recomputing these numbers or otherwise
mucking about with shifts to ensure its back to 10 when we do this load
muck.
--
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