Re: [RFC v5 8/9] sched/deadline: base GRUB reclaiming on the inactive utilization

From	Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@santannapisa.it>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [RFC v5 8/9] sched/deadline: base GRUB reclaiming on the inactive utilization
Date	2017-05-09 11:40 +0200
Message-ID	<tF9MC-8jT-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<toh3P-72e-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <toh3P-72e-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <tpDOF-Ur-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <tELAC-10e-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <tEM3E-1q2-21@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Mon, 8 May 2017 10:06:13 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
[...]
> > > #define BW_SHIFT	20
> > > #define BW_UNIT		(1 << BW_SHIFT)
> > > 
> > > static inline
> > > u64 grub_reclaim(u64 delta, struct rq *rq, struct sched_dl_entity
> > > *dl_se) {
> > > u64 u_inact = rq->dl.this_bw - rq->dl.running_bw; /* Utot -
> > > Uact */ u64 u_act;  
> > [...]
> > 
> > I think introducing the BW_SHIFT and BW_UNIT defines can be more
> > useful in a previous patch (patch 4, where I introduce the
> > "grub_reclaim()" function, and use ">> 20" for the first time.  
> 
> Sure..
> 
> > Moreover, the "20" magic number is already used in core.c... Should
> > I introduce the defines in sched/sched.h, and change the existing
> > core.c code too?  
> 
> Yes please.
> 
> > Is it ok to embed this change in patch 4 (sched/deadline:
> > implement GRUB accounting), or should it go in a separate patch?  
> 
> Whatever you feel is nicest. Currently the thing is fully contained in
> the one to_ratio() function (afaict), so the first patch where you
> make it escape would be fine.

Ok, thanks. I included this change in patch 4 (the first one using the
"20") and I put the two defines in sched.h, immediately before the
prototype of to_ratio().

I am finishing with the requested changes, and after some days of
testing I'll post a new patchset.


			Thanks,
				Luca

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: [RFC v5 8/9] sched/deadline: base GRUB reclaiming on the  inactive utilization Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@santannapisa.it> - 2017-05-08 09:50 +0200
  Re: [RFC v5 8/9] sched/deadline: base GRUB reclaiming on the  inactive utilization Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-05-08 10:20 +0200
    Re: [RFC v5 8/9] sched/deadline: base GRUB reclaiming on the  inactive utilization Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@santannapisa.it> - 2017-05-09 11:40 +0200

csiph-web