[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1bf450ee-a731-794c-452c-654a508365b5@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 15:35:30 +0530
From: Parth Shah <parth@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>, mingo@...hat.com,
peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com,
mgorman@...e.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: pauld@...hat.com, valentin.schneider@....com, hdanton@...a.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/5] sched/pelt: Add a new runnable average signal
On 2/21/20 6:57 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> Now that runnable_load_avg has been removed, we can replace it by a new
> signal that will highlight the runnable pressure on a cfs_rq. This signal
> track the waiting time of tasks on rq and can help to better define the
> state of rqs.
[...]
> @@ -5389,6 +5444,11 @@ static unsigned long cpu_load_without(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
> return load;
> }
>
> +static unsigned long cpu_runnable(struct rq *rq)
> +{
> + return cfs_rq_runnable_avg(&rq->cfs);
> +}
Why not move cpu-runnable definition to Patch 5? to get rid of
warning: ‘cpu_runnable’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
static unsigned long cpu_runnable(struct rq *rq)
[...]
- Parth
Powered by blists - more mailing lists