From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC86DC07E85 for ; Tue, 11 Dec 2018 12:01:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A259A20811 for ; Tue, 11 Dec 2018 12:01:38 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1544529698; bh=kC6rcTcQTNHu3fiYUVe3T6AMIjaDqbpl37+WfNkHT8A=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:List-ID:From; b=ndBt23O/E5uU6OVcT2PYptdnZmB3F8z7QO/9nZeaXkt8Qv/5ri958B6UosjqiaiDv E78sNB5fbJJaUZ/gqsdyamHFx8mHMdgAYwHPxbGAORyT6OXoIwEVrdZu62fXOTWxvU XZFYATlKMoJ9iktiC8QOegKTD/56MPc+oVLjuvHI= DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org A259A20811 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726434AbeLKMBh (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Dec 2018 07:01:37 -0500 Received: from mail-oi1-f194.google.com ([209.85.167.194]:39591 "EHLO mail-oi1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726251AbeLKMBh (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Dec 2018 07:01:37 -0500 Received: by mail-oi1-f194.google.com with SMTP id i6so11772170oia.6; Tue, 11 Dec 2018 04:01:36 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=u9R7kYIs00E3HzyVWYgkKORnnr1uEQvNh2bgTIpwBAk=; b=npVo9BcMZ9EgbfjPT+Tj7Ip8BdyebyFXuDYtvYRxI4MXJkkPHu47BHLpy+exjxj5QU 96K8iZFO1PoRJjrKlFF0muEuSPos9NXRJ2neoPkYB+2cMMEBYEFGux/ww9ot1gaW6vg8 XewoWF5n6bhMR5oNQAvrwZzUDMLfj87REPK+nnYQI3/YaF6kpPGEPs9QDtiX0rSkKR6J XSQIth247qaY/aFMBE9JTBxFuh6qPDJuTkgZ1RJQpC7bS3+HK81MbnhOcyvcBGMncIMp X6HHwRxl4IU27xwq1UTFs3XT/pipxJvV/3ZfsVka3Ms80AJr45ICLlEX6kSTvB1TKuSH +1dw== X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWbIuhZ5U5HESKC6i7qsESPxNYFh6vLqIZ9ptBFr44OEXEyB27RQ 1TpF9gDXVdX/oV/L1E52ZC2uMhAhfHjtLyM1lHw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/VKEBab/Vw9U8z338/Q/ohpVD9FzLyVj636F1/WuMD2qyOhkX+p2mtku5V+e3Rv06ar/KQ4ee3PbV+fqtZ/rhQ= X-Received: by 2002:a54:4d01:: with SMTP id v1mr1055045oix.246.1544529696047; Tue, 11 Dec 2018 04:01:36 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20181203095628.11858-1-quentin.perret@arm.com> <20181203095628.11858-3-quentin.perret@arm.com> In-Reply-To: <20181203095628.11858-3-quentin.perret@arm.com> From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 13:01:24 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 02/15] sched/cpufreq: Prepare schedutil for Energy Aware Scheduling To: Quentin Perret Cc: Peter Zijlstra , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux PM , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Ingo Molnar , Dietmar Eggemann , Morten Rasmussen , Chris Redpath , Patrick Bellasi , Valentin Schneider , Vincent Guittot , Thara Gopinath , Viresh Kumar , Todd Kjos , Joel Fernandes , Steve Muckle , adharmap@codeaurora.org, Saravana Kannan , Pavan Kondeti , Juri Lelli , Eduardo Valentin , Srinivas Pandruvada , currojerez@riseup.net, Javi Merino Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 10:56 AM Quentin Perret wrote: [cut] > #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_SCHEDUTIL > +/** > + * enum schedutil_type - CPU utilization type > + * @FREQUENCY_UTIL: Utilization used to select frequency > + * @ENERGY_UTIL: Utilization used during energy calculation > + * > + * The utilization signals of all scheduling classes (CFS/RT/DL) and IRQ time > + * need to be aggregated differently depending on the usage made of them. This > + * enum is used within schedutil_freq_util() to differentiate the types of > + * utilization expected by the callers, and adjust the aggregation accordingly. > + */ > +enum schedutil_type { > + FREQUENCY_UTIL, > + ENERGY_UTIL, > +}; Why not to use bool instead of this? Do you expect to have more than just two values in the future? If so, what would be the third one?