From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1755916Ab3HZEhV (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 26 Aug 2013 00:37:21 -0400
Received: from mail-qe0-f43.google.com ([209.85.128.43]:37895 "EHLO
	mail-qe0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1755179Ab3HZEhT (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 26 Aug 2013 00:37:19 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CALZhoSRtyS1G6jpKwxqyx=GxFP8dvo0Qq=wGfNkw=Kya3yBEow@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20130819160058.539049611@infradead.org> <20130819160425.230612223@infradead.org>
 <CALZhoSRtyS1G6jpKwxqyx=GxFP8dvo0Qq=wGfNkw=Kya3yBEow@mail.gmail.com>
From: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2013 21:36:48 -0700
Message-ID: <CAPM31R+W56bOfex18i4+ywNKW5EJz0Rq32bGZbWEYVyKgKVy_A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/10] sched: Clean-up struct sd_lb_stat
To: Lei Wen <adrian.wenl@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
        Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>,
        Preeti U Murthy <preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>, Lei Wen <leiwen@marvell.com>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>, Joonsoo Kim <js1304@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 7:56 PM, Lei Wen <adrian.wenl@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:01 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>> From: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
>>
>> There is no reason to maintain separate variables for this_group
>> and busiest_group in sd_lb_stat, except saving some space.
>> But this structure is always allocated in stack, so this saving
>> isn't really benificial [peterz: reducing stack space is good; in this
>> case readability increases enough that I think its still beneficial]
>>
>> This patch unify these variables, so IMO, readability may be improved.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
>> [peterz: lots of style edits, a few fixes and a rename]
>> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1375778203-31343-4-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com
>> ---
>>  kernel/sched/fair.c |  225 +++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------
>>  1 file changed, 112 insertions(+), 113 deletions(-)
>>
>> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> @@ -4277,36 +4277,6 @@ static unsigned long task_h_load(struct
>>
> [snip]...
>> -       env->imbalance = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST(
>> -               sds->max_load * sds->busiest->sgp->power, SCHED_POWER_SCALE);
>> +       env->imbalance = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST(sds->busiest_stat.avg_load *
>> +                               sds->busiest->sgp->power, SCHED_POWER_SCALE);
>>
>
> I am wondering whether we could change this line as below is more appropriate,
> since it would avoid the division here:
>        env->imbalance = (sds->busiest_stat.avg_load * sds->busiest->sgp->power)
>                                       >> SCHED_POWER_SHIFT;
>
> I am not sure whether compiler would be smarter enough to covert into
>>> operation,
> if it see SCHED_POWER_SCALE is 1024 here.

This would change the rounding.  Fortunately, gcc is smart enough to
handle this.