On Mon, 8 May 2017 10:06:13 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]> 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
