From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755135Ab3EFQUs (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 May 2013 12:20:48 -0400 Received: from e23smtp04.au.ibm.com ([202.81.31.146]:32861 "EHLO e23smtp04.au.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754341Ab3EFQUp (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 May 2013 12:20:45 -0400 Message-ID: <51878A48.6040003@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 06 May 2013 16:17:36 +0530 From: Preeti U Murthy User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120717 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Turner CC: Alex Shi , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , Andrew Morton , Borislav Petkov , Namhyung Kim , Mike Galbraith , Morten Rasmussen , Vincent Guittot , Viresh Kumar , LKML , Mel Gorman , Rik van Riel , Michael Wang Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/7] sched: remove SMP cover for runnable variables in cfs_rq References: <1367804711-30308-1-git-send-email-alex.shi@intel.com> <1367804711-30308-3-git-send-email-alex.shi@intel.com> <5187708A.20103@intel.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 13050613-9264-0000-0000-000003AED893 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Paul, On 05/06/2013 02:38 PM, Paul Turner wrote: > On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 1:57 AM, Alex Shi wrote: >> On 05/06/2013 04:01 PM, Paul Turner wrote: >>> On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 6:45 PM, Alex Shi wrote: >>>> The following variables were covered under CONFIG_SMP in struct cfs_rq. >>>> but similar runnable variables work for UP in struct rq and task_group. >>>> like rq->avg, task_group->load_avg. >>>> So move them out, they also can work with UP. >>> >>> Is there a proposed use-case for UP? My apologies if I missed it in >>> an alternate patch. >> >>> It would seem the only possibly useful thing there would the the >>> per-rq average for p-state selection; but we can get that without the >>> per-entity values already. >> >> >> Do you mean to move the rq->avg and task_group->load_avg into CONFIG_SMP? > > More generally: Why do we need them in !CONFIG_SMP? > > [ I was suggesting (potentially) using only rq->avg in the !CONFIG_SMP case. ] If you were to have runnable_load_avg and blocked_load_avg of cfs_rq under CONFIG_SMP, how will tg->load_avg get updated? tg->load_avg is not SMP dependent. tg->load_avg in-turn is used to decide the CPU shares of the sched entities on the processor right? Thanks Regards Preeti U Murthy