linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] cpufreq/schedutil: Cleanup, document and fix iowait boost

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20180411145407.GQ7671@vireshk-i7>
Date:   Wed, 11 Apr 2018 20:24:07 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>,
        Steve Muckle <smuckle@...gle.com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cpufreq/schedutil: Cleanup, document and fix iowait
 boost

On 11-04-18, 15:39, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> On 11-Apr 12:58, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 11:44:45AM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> > > > > - sugov_set_iowait_boost: is now in charge only to set/increase the IO
> > > > >      wait boost, every time a task wakes up from an IO wait.
> > > > > 
> > > > > - sugov_iowait_boost: is now in charge to reset/reduce the IO wait
> > > > >      boost, every time a sugov update is triggered, as well as
> > > > >      to (eventually) enforce the currently required IO boost value.
> > > > 
> > > > I'm not sold on those function names; feels like we can do better,
> > > > although I'm struggling to come up with anything sensible just now.
> > > 
> > > What about something like:
> > > 
> > >  sugov_iowait_init()
> > >  since here we are mainly initializing the iowait boost
> > > 
> > >  sugov_iowait_boost()
> > >  since here we are mainly applying the proper boost to each cpu
> > > 
> > > Although they are not really so different...
> > 
> > How about:
> > 
> >   sugov_iowait_boost() -- does the actual impulse/boost
> >   sugov_iowait_apply() -- applies the boost state
> > 
> > ?
> 
> Whould say it can work too, and it also allows to add a:
> 
>     sugov_iowait_reset() -- resets boots state after
>                             TICK_NSEC CPU idle time
> 
> Viresh, Rafael, Joel: any preferences or other suggestions?

Looks like no matter how we rename it, someone will find it confusing
:)

-- 
viresh