From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@kernel.org, joel.opensrc@gmail.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, juri.lelli@gmail.com,
kernel-team@lge.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 2/2] sched/rt: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_lowest_rq()
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2017 21:47:59 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170824214759.441e5fcf@gandalf.local.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170825013100.GC3858@X58A-UD3R>
On Fri, 25 Aug 2017 10:31:00 +0900
Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 09:55:14AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 10:06:03 +0900
> > Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello Steven,
> > >
> > > Can I keep your reviewed-by with comments modified?
> >
> > Yes, but I have one nit.
> >
> >
> > > @@ -1668,9 +1691,35 @@ static int find_lowest_rq(struct task_struct *task)
> > > return this_cpu;
> > > }
> > >
> > > - best_cpu = cpumask_first_and(lowest_mask,
> > > - sched_domain_span(sd));
> > > + /*
> > > + * If a cpu being in lowest_mask & current sd &
> > > + * ~prefer sd is valid, that becomes our choice.
> >
> > I can't parse the above sentence.
>
> I might have simplified the comment too much.
>
> ~prefer means we want to exclude the domain span having SD_PREFER_SIBLING,
> since they should be considered as fallback candidates.
>
> W/o ~prefer, a cpu in the domain might be chosen when we consider higher
> domain than the domain having SD_PREFER_SIBLING, as the best cpu, not
> fallback.
That actually wasn't the hard part. It was the entire sentence that is
very confusing. What is the definition of "is valid" in this context?
Do you just mean "< nr_cpu_ids"? If that's the case you are also being
redundant. Because if the "if" statement is true, then it will be
valid. What about just saying something like:
/*
* If a cpu exists that is in the lowest_mask and the current sd span,
* but not in the prefer sd span, then that becomes our choice.
*/
-- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-25 1:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-24 1:06 [PATCH v10 0/2] Make find_later_rq() choose a closer cpu in topology Byungchul Park
2017-08-24 1:06 ` [PATCH v10 1/2] sched/deadline: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_later_rq() Byungchul Park
2017-08-24 1:06 ` [PATCH v10 2/2] sched/rt: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_lowest_rq() Byungchul Park
2017-08-24 13:55 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-08-25 1:31 ` Byungchul Park
2017-08-25 1:47 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2017-08-25 2:03 ` Byungchul Park
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=20170824214759.441e5fcf@gandalf.local.home \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=byungchul.park@lge.com \
--cc=joel.opensrc@gmail.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel-team@lge.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®