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 S1752273AbcEVKd6 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sun, 22 May 2016 06:33:58 -0400
Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:41312 "EHLO
	merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752166AbcEVKd4 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sun, 22 May 2016 06:33:56 -0400
Date: Sun, 22 May 2016 12:33:45 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Pavan Kondeti <pkondeti@codeaurora.org>,
        Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
        Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
        Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        byungchul.park@lge.com, Andrew Hunter <ahh@google.com>
Subject: Re: [patch] sched/fair: Move se->vruntime normalization state into
 struct sched_entity
Message-ID: <20160522103345.GR3205@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20160510174314.355953085@infradead.org>
 <20160510174613.902178264@infradead.org>
 <1463839488.24578.45.camel@suse.de>
 <1463857236.10353.5.camel@gmail.com>
 <1463900401.30072.6.camel@gmail.com>
 <20160522093638.GL3193@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160522093638.GL3193@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 11:36:38AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > 
> > sched/fair: Move se->vruntime normalization state into struct sched_entity
> 
> Yeah, I used to have a patch like this; but for debugging. I don't
> particularly like carrying this information other than for verification
> because it means we either do too much or too little normalization.
> 
> I'll try and have a look on Monday, but I got some real-life things to
> sort out first..

Ah, I think I see why we might actually need a variable this time...
Brain seems to have worked overtime while pulling weeds in the garden
:-)

In any case, I'll have a look on Monday.