linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] sched/pelt: Add a new runnable average signal

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]

Date:   Tue, 18 Feb 2020 16:30:42 +0000
From:   Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>
To:     Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>, Parth Shah <parth@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] sched/pelt: Add a new runnable average signal

On 18/02/2020 15:28, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>>> @@ -532,8 +535,8 @@ void print_cfs_rq(struct seq_file *m, int cpu, struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
>>>                       cfs_rq->removed.load_avg);
>>>       SEQ_printf(m, "  .%-30s: %ld\n", "removed.util_avg",
>>>                       cfs_rq->removed.util_avg);
>>> -     SEQ_printf(m, "  .%-30s: %ld\n", "removed.runnable_sum",
>>> -                     cfs_rq->removed.runnable_sum);
>>
>> Shouldn't that have been part of patch 3?
> 
> No this was used to propagate load_avg
> 

Right, sorry about that.

>> <fugly here>
>> +DECLARE_UPDATE_TG_CFS_SIGNAL(util);
>> +DECLARE_UPDATE_TG_CFS_SIGNAL(runnable);
> 
> TBH, I prefer keeping the current version which is easier to read IMO
> 

I did call it an eldritch horror :-) I agree with you here, it's a shame we
don't really have better ways to factorize this (I don't think splitting the
inputs is really an alternative).