Hello, Vivek. On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 03:46:09PM -0500, Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 02:41:19PM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote: > > To prepare for blkcg hierarchy support, add cfqg->nr_active and > > ->level_weight. cfqg->nr_active counts the number of active cfqgs at > > the cfqg's level and ->level_weight is sum of weights of those cfqgs. > > The level covers itself (cfqg->leaf_weight) and immediate children. > > This notion of level is really confusing. If one says "at cfqg's level" > I immediately associate with cfqg's siblings and not with cfqg's children.
We can explicitly say at children's level but I think it should be enough to explain it clearly in the comment where the field is defined. > I think confusion happens because we are overloading the definition of > cfqg. It is competing with its siblings at the same time it is competing > against its child groups (on behalf of its children tasks). While I agree that part is a bit tricky, I can't think of a much better way to describe it. Any better ideas? Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
