From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
To: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@linaro.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] sched: expel confusing usage of the term "power"
Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 16:07:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53849C13.5010007@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1401142779-6633-1-git-send-email-nicolas.pitre@linaro.org>
On 05/27/2014 12:19 AM, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> "Power" is a very bad term in the scheduler context. There are so many
> meanings that can be attached to it. And with the upcoming "power
> aware" scheduler work, confusion is sure to happen.
>
> The definition of "power" is typically the rate at which work is performed,
> energy is converted or electric energy is transferred. The notion of
> "compute capacity" is rather at odds with "power" to the point many
> comments in the code have to make it explicit that "capacity" is the
> actual intended meaning.
>
> So let's make it clear what we man by using "capacity" in place of "power"
> directly in the code. That will make the introduction of actual "power
> consumption" concepts much clearer later on.
>
> This is based on the latest tip tree to apply correctly on top of existing
> scheduler changes already queued there.
>
> Changes from v1:
>
> - capa_factor and SCHED_CAPA_* changed to be spelled "capacity" in full
> to save peterz some Chupacabra nightmares
>
> - some minor corrections in commit logs
>
> - rebased on latest tip tree
>
>
> arch/arm/kernel/topology.c | 54 +++----
> include/linux/sched.h | 8 +-
> kernel/sched/core.c | 87 ++++++-----
> kernel/sched/fair.c | 323 ++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
> kernel/sched/sched.h | 18 +--
> 5 files changed, 246 insertions(+), 244 deletions(-)
Hi Nico,
it is a good initiative to replace the 'power' word by another to
prevent confusion for future code. Personally I have a preference to
'strength' instead of 'capacity', in case that matter.
Apart that:
Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
Thanks
-- Daniel
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-27 14:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-26 22:19 Nicolas Pitre
2014-05-26 22:19 ` [PATCH v2 1/6] sched/fair.c: remove "power" from struct numa_stats Nicolas Pitre
2014-05-27 3:07 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-05-27 3:18 ` Nicolas Pitre
2014-05-27 4:32 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-05-26 22:19 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] sched/fair.c: change "has_capacity" to "has_free_capacity" Nicolas Pitre
2014-05-26 22:19 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] sched/fair.c: disambiguate existing/remaining "capacity" usage Nicolas Pitre
2014-05-26 22:19 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] sched: let struct sched_group_power care about CPU capacity Nicolas Pitre
2014-05-26 22:19 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] sched: remove remaining dubious usage of "power" Nicolas Pitre
2014-05-26 22:19 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] sched: final power vs capacity cleanup Nicolas Pitre
2014-05-27 7:30 ` [PATCH v2 0/6] sched: expel confusing usage of the term "power" Vincent Guittot
2014-05-27 14:46 ` Nicolas Pitre
2014-05-27 14:07 ` Daniel Lezcano [this message]
2014-05-27 16:02 ` Nicolas Pitre
2014-05-27 16:14 ` Daniel Lezcano
2014-05-27 17:50 ` [PATCH v2 7/6] sched: rename capacity related flags Nicolas Pitre
2014-05-28 6:46 ` [PATCH v2 0/6] sched: expel confusing usage of the term "power" Peter Zijlstra
2014-06-05 10:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2014-06-05 10:16 ` Ingo Molnar
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=53849C13.5010007@linaro.org \
--to=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
--cc=nicolas.pitre@linaro.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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
Powered by JetHome