From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932299AbeBPJoi (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Feb 2018 04:44:38 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-f65.google.com ([74.125.82.65]:37791 "EHLO mail-wm0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932120AbeBPJoh (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Feb 2018 04:44:37 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x224JmIxnnHtWYMFnE3pWKNsUyX9QahkXs5VBJAJ68MpPqu7fSEoABbyTzhr7FhU5DMqMQawQfA== Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 10:44:32 +0100 From: Juri Lelli To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Christopher Diaz Riveros , mingo@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH-next] sched/headers: Clean up Message-ID: <20180216094432.GG8032@localhost.localdomain> References: <20180215154318.15894-1-chrisadr@gentoo.org> <20180215165212.GB25181@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180215165212.GB25181@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 15/02/18 17:52, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 10:43:18AM -0500, Christopher Diaz Riveros wrote: [...] > > @@ -437,20 +437,28 @@ struct sched_dl_entity { > > * during sched_setattr(), they will remain the same until > > * the next sched_setattr(). > > */ > > - u64 dl_runtime; /* Maximum runtime for each instance */ > > - u64 dl_deadline; /* Relative deadline of each instance */ > > - u64 dl_period; /* Separation of two instances (period) */ > > - u64 dl_bw; /* dl_runtime / dl_period */ > > - u64 dl_density; /* dl_runtime / dl_deadline */ > > + /* Maximum runtime for each instance */ > > + u64 dl_runtime; > > + /* Relative deadline of each instance */ > > + u64 dl_deadline; > > + /* Separation of two instances (period) */ > > + u64 dl_period; > > + /* dl_runtime / dl_period */ > > + u64 dl_bw; > > + /* dl_runtime / dl_deadline */ > > + u64 dl_density; > > That's a whole lot less readable :/ Yep. :(