linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 04/10] sched/dl: add dl

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: <CAKfTPtCx_pOOvR1ugh7fTadFuQAt711OsqLUdg=sTYtuMmYZDg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 30 May 2018 13:51:26 +0200
From:   Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
To:     Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Morten Rasmussen <Morten.Rasmussen@....com>,
        viresh kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>,
        Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 04/10] sched/dl: add dl_rq utilization tracking

On 30 May 2018 at 12:50, Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com> wrote:
> On 25-May 15:12, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> index fb18bcc..967e873 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> @@ -7290,11 +7290,14 @@ static inline bool cfs_rq_has_blocked(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
>>       return false;
>>  }
>>
>> -static inline bool rt_rq_has_blocked(struct rq *rq)
>> +static inline bool others_rqs_have_blocked(struct rq *rq)
>
> Here you are going to fold in IRQ's utilization which, strictly
> speaking, is not a RQ. Moreover, we are checking only utilization.
>
> Can we use a better matching name? E.g.
>    others_have_blocked_util
>    non_cfs_blocked_util

others_have_blocked looks ok and consistent with cfs_rq_has_blocked

> ?
>
>>  {
>>       if (rq->avg_rt.util_avg)
>>               return true;
>>
>> +     if (rq->avg_dl.util_avg)
>> +             return true;
>> +
>>       return false;
>>  }
>>
> --
> #include <best/regards.h>
>
> Patrick Bellasi