linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/8] sched/fair: rework load

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: <020cd226-ded2-274b-f62b-8db17b65e729@arm.com>
Date:   Wed, 28 Aug 2019 11:25:02 +0100
From:   Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>
To:     Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>,
        Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Morten Rasmussen <Morten.Rasmussen@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/8] sched/fair: rework load_balance

On 26/08/2019 10:26, Vincent Guittot wrote:
[...]
>>>   busiest group.
>>> - calculate_imbalance() decides what have to be moved.
>>
>> That's nothing new, isn't it? I think what you mean there is that the
> 
> There is 2 things:
> -part of the algorithm is new and fixes wrong task placement
> -everything has been consolidated in the 3 functions above whereas
> there were some bypasses and hack in the current code
> 

Right, something like that could be added in the changelog then.

[...]
>>> @@ -7745,10 +7793,10 @@ struct sg_lb_stats {
>>>  struct sd_lb_stats {
>>>       struct sched_group *busiest;    /* Busiest group in this sd */
>>>       struct sched_group *local;      /* Local group in this sd */
>>> -     unsigned long total_running;
>>
>> Could be worth calling out in the log that this gets snipped out. Or it
>> could go into its own small cleanup patch, since it's just an unused field.
> 
> I can mention it more specifically in the log but that's part of those
> meaningless metrics which is no more used

I'm a git blame addict so I like having things split up as much as possible
(within reason). Since that cleanup can live in its own patch, it should
be split as such IMO.