[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f15b27fa-6802-6bab-5d5c-93f7134debec@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2022 14:34:23 +0200
From: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@...tannapisa.it>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] sched/deadline: Use sched_dl_entity's dl_density in
dl_task_fits_capacity()
On 06/07/2022 12:47, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Jun 2022 at 14:21, Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com> wrote:
[...]
>> static inline bool dl_task_fits_capacity(struct task_struct *p, int cpu)
>> {
>> unsigned long cap = arch_scale_cpu_capacity(cpu);
>>
>> - return cap_scale(p->dl.dl_deadline, cap) >= p->dl.dl_runtime;
>> + return cap >= p->dl.dl_density >> SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT;
>
> There is no direct relation between BW_SHIFT and SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT
> and we can change one without modifying the other.
>
> Should you use (BW_SHIFT-SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT) instead of SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT ?
Yes, that's better, similar to cpu_bw_dl(). Thanks!
[...]
Powered by blists - more mailing lists