[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKfTPtBSm9w7uKpQ8r9YcTMT86j2_cqdZ-BCrkv5yhJJJud0ug@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2023 10:02:35 +0200
From: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com,
mgorman@...e.de, bristot@...hat.com, vschneid@...hat.com,
rafael@...nel.org, viresh.kumar@...aro.org, qyousef@...alina.io,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
lukasz.luba@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched/schedutil: rework performance estimation
On Fri, 13 Oct 2023 at 20:21, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
>
> * Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> > +
> > + /* The minimum utilization returns the highest level between:
> > + * - the computed DL bandwidth needed with the irq pressure which
> > + * steals time to the deadline task.
> > + * - The minimum bandwidth requirement for CFS.
> > + */
>
> Nit: please use the standard multi-line Linux kernel comment style.
Yes, I don't know how I ended up with such comment style. I will fix
it and others below
>
> > + /* The maximum hint is a soft bandwidth requirement which can be lower
> > + * than the actual utilization because of max uclamp requirments
> > */
>
> Ditto.
>
> > +unsigned long sugov_effective_cpu_perf(int cpu, unsigned long actual,
> > + unsigned long min,
> > + unsigned long max)
> > +{
> > + unsigned long target;
> > + struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
> > +
> > + if (rt_rq_is_runnable(&rq->rt))
> > + return max;
> > +
> > + /* Provide at least enough capacity for DL + irq */
> > + target = min;
>
> s/ / /
> s/irq/IRQ/
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists