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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).