[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKfTPtBwnLLFmbubqhp_Dn-vDJx-Ue3TQ9Q=tNb=m=yHqG+_Hg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2022 15:55:23 +0100
From: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
To: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: 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, parth@...ux.ibm.com,
qais.yousef@....com, chris.hyser@...cle.com,
pkondeti@...eaurora.org, Valentin.Schneider@....com,
patrick.bellasi@...bug.net, David.Laight@...lab.com,
pjt@...gle.com, pavel@....cz, tj@...nel.org,
dhaval.giani@...cle.com, qperret@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] sched: Allow sched_{get,set}attr to change
latency_nice of the task
On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 at 01:22, Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2022-03-11 at 17:14 +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> >
> > +static void __setscheduler_latency(struct task_struct *p,
> > + const struct sched_attr *attr)
> > +{
> > + if (attr->sched_flags & SCHED_FLAG_LATENCY_NICE) {
> > + p->latency_prio = NICE_TO_LATENCY(attr->sched_latency_nice);
>
> NICE_TO_LATENCY used here but has defined later in patch 5. This will break
> bisect.
yes, I have done a mistake when reorganizing the patchset.
latency_prio replaces latency_nice in patch 5 so it should still be
latency_nice field here instead of latency_prio.
Will fix it.
>
> > + set_latency_weight(p);
> > + }
> > }
> >
> >
>
> Tim
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists