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=-2.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 3B643C2BA83 for ; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 17:36:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 051E120873 for ; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 17:36:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="rB5+NwrZ" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728742AbgBMRgX (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Feb 2020 12:36:23 -0500 Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:60330 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727991AbgBMRgW (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Feb 2020 12:36:22 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=E+YqIGqhXaGLiebcnUyrjQpIFvsGWbiVb9DTwDgNSSk=; b=rB5+NwrZK62P2emdnqHG7SkBgJ xLwI5SiXX29jCKmHgi11HW24ja88d8WfbzYNMtrSzUzV1bThxnzp6ejG56xRCrcymbPy4z+o+MjPk PAKu8bAbPmqeXYXtpiGZ6/kdfbG87J6eqUEGaZ44eNeAjTDi/wgTF2MLyN1TVvWvUkZkuWAwLebHM bDbbbvMwwEi+9DGzU2nNRlfGkN4dm4sEQ4QkOOY2xw7lKY3/VgjGfPXCo2bTgKsAtDzLoAIcjxOVw AQVLgQG++n3nEisrfPZriO+jQIkLQSkDvocoL9aiwkwaPjFbkIoqjWQQisPtwCPxXMu8CERVp14oO LPoCzH3w==; Received: from j217100.upc-j.chello.nl ([24.132.217.100] helo=noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtpsa (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1j2IPE-0001bw-Rt; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 17:36:05 +0000 Received: from hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net (hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net [192.168.1.225]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A64130066E; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 18:34:12 +0100 (CET) Received: by hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6C8A220206D63; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 18:36:02 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 18:36:02 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Vincent Guittot Cc: mingo@redhat.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pauld@redhat.com, parth@linux.ibm.com, valentin.schneider@arm.com Subject: Re: [RFC 3/4] sched/fair: replace runnable load average by runnable average Message-ID: <20200213173602.GQ14897@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20200211174651.10330-1-vincent.guittot@linaro.org> <20200211174651.10330-4-vincent.guittot@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200211174651.10330-4-vincent.guittot@linaro.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 06:46:50PM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote: > @@ -367,6 +367,14 @@ struct util_est { > * For cfs_rq, it is the aggregated load_avg of all runnable and > * blocked sched_entities. > * > + * [runnable_avg definition] > + * > + * runnable_avg = runnable% * SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE right, just like we have for util_avg. > + * > + * where runnable% is the time ratio that a sched_entity is runnable. > + * For cfs_rq, it is the aggregated runnable_avg of all runnable and > + * blocked sched_entities. Which is a verbatim repeat of the runnable% definition for load_avg, right? Perhaps re-arrange the text such that we only have a single definition for each symbol? > + * > * [util_avg definition] > * > * util_avg = running% * SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE Can you please split this patch in two? First remove everything runnable_load_avg, and then introduce runnable_avg. I didn't quickly spot anything off, and you're right that runnable vs util is an interesting signal.