From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Rearrange select_task_rq_fair() to optimize it
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:19:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0985e709-0d71-2c08-20a9-7bfb618fb5f2@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180424104304.GE4064@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 24/04/18 11:43, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 11:02:26AM +0100, Valentin Schneider wrote:
>> I'd argue making things easier to read is a non-negligible part as well.
>
> Right, so I don't object to either of these (I think); but it would be
> good to see this in combination with that proposed EAS change.
>
True, I would've said the call to find_energy_efficient_cpu() ([1]) could
simply be added to the if (sd) {} case, but...
> I think you (valentin) wanted to side-step the entire domain loop in
> that case or something.
>
...this would change more things. Admittedly I've been sort of out of the loop
(no pun intended) lately, but this doesn't ring a bell. That might have been
the other frenchie (Quentin) :)
> But yes, getting this code more readable is defninitely useful.
>
[1]: See [RFC PATCH v2 5/6] sched/fair: Select an energy-efficient CPU on task wake-up
@ https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/4/6/856
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-24 11:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-23 10:38 [PATCH] sched/fair: Rearrange select_task_rq_fair() to optimize it Viresh Kumar
2018-04-24 10:02 ` Valentin Schneider
2018-04-24 10:30 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-04-24 10:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-24 11:19 ` Valentin Schneider [this message]
2018-04-24 12:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-24 15:46 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-04-24 15:47 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-04-24 22:34 ` Rohit Jain
2018-04-25 2:51 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-04-25 16:48 ` Rohit Jain
2018-04-25 5:15 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-04-25 8:13 ` Quentin Perret
2018-04-25 9:03 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-04-25 9:39 ` Quentin Perret
2018-04-25 10:13 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-04-25 10:55 ` Quentin Perret
2018-04-25 8:12 ` Quentin Perret
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=0985e709-0d71-2c08-20a9-7bfb618fb5f2@arm.com \
--to=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=quentin.perret@arm.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.