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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 17:55:35 +0100 From: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org> To: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Fix ftq noise bench regression On 22 March 2017 at 17:22, Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com> wrote: > On 22/03/17 09:22, Vincent Guittot wrote: >> On 21 March 2017 at 18:46, Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com> wrote: >>> Hi Vincent, >>> >>> On 17/03/17 13:47, Vincent Guittot wrote: >>> >>> [...] >>> >>>> Reported-by: ying.huang@...ux.intel.com >>>> Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org> >>>> Fixes: 4e5160766fcc ("sched/fair: Propagate asynchrous detach") > > [...] > >>> Why not turn skip_blocked_update(se) into blocked_update_needed(cpu, cfs_rq)? >>> Saves a couple of patch lines: >> >> Are you sure that we are saving some patch lines ? > > Sorry, it's actually the same :-) > >> >> I tend to agree on the name and but not on parameters. >> IMO, it's easier to understand the purpose of >> blocked_update_needed(se) compared to blocked_update_needed(cpu, >> cfs_rq) > > OK, so: > > - /* Propagate pending load changes to the parent */ > - if (cfs_rq->tg->se[cpu]) > + /* Propagate pending load changes to the parent if any */ > + if (blocked_update_needed(cfs_rq->tg->se[cpu])) > > and > > +static inline bool blocked_update_needed(struct sched_entity *se) > +{ > + struct cfs_rq *gcfs_rq = group_cfs_rq(se); gcfs_rq can't be set before testing that se is not null > + > + /* cfs_rq of a root task_group has no sched_entity counterpart */ > + if (!se) > + return false; > + > + /* > + * If sched_entity still have not null load or utilization, we > have to > + * decay it. > + */ > .... > > Would make sense to me ...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists