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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4936FC43334 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 17:57:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233448AbiF1R5Y (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jun 2022 13:57:24 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43964 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233381AbiF1R5V (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jun 2022 13:57:21 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-x42c.google.com (mail-pf1-x42c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::42c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78DB863EF for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 10:57:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-x42c.google.com with SMTP id 128so12658261pfv.12 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 10:57:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=SyXP69UMdpWhbeCjVMeoYpoBgv9ZnYwJYIVHkhJptJk=; b=W7LI5MjRbDRJuY3TkbfMVg3CvpLTFQpVGwBoa75khlNp1ZdHPydtPqdBx90PVaeKYs E8P4BqbFG2iFDfzssjEaMp6oRYfSQ5GVOB3st43drA1/x6wgqiVSTY2eUWCnuI3XnYac FP9IqQ0sMrhEjeu0VtA9uOQiAqAP2K4UDjW+e51WoJm7ZrDNXOrdXFIzP6E8oycOftbm KHPNga83xVw1OsGbgOAuoG+FIPteLglULZxn7ndByqXmFxCSZWeEXNE9RP95HtgIzCJ4 oHM/i7Y3zY6hTGGtD2jVBXeuj6bveEobxbx+NANP00zUU4wknXeP2rksKhNbzmzRjBL5 bhag== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=SyXP69UMdpWhbeCjVMeoYpoBgv9ZnYwJYIVHkhJptJk=; b=7MMdZdH1oDw8wIE3TSB091IkFCvWCHmFaj5J3uIW+g2gokBmjhbbcI3Aw/ZXZemDD6 V8HAF24uQm/EuVAp7IlrBc/BCjw8Djsn/27UySnhQ90nHHLCYfHW8/mmJf8c2IvlU20O aSoRmntIWAJOf5vqKfU3hWzs9PK2/K/IBy4iNKgasQoSPjOHpzv3Ze0x7oXZIJET9NY6 oXv837+OM/JocqSUv9jy0W7/04zOY4eT7cSUPITLsZq6on5jG9Ws1qTdfo7TKt6VU6NE HwlEQ9NQejGrUEu4tTfsUHVKJn3vByGzGuY8h14miEBvfxm51z97NuuUwUNGdOFD3Woh 78WQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora+GPEVPIGNzSLhoi6GUy8R+5rUFpHEeDe7D4S+igsgnGOS/jTPU 7iXDBDiq+7HurCp6JOM7k+w= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1u0MylCDOrOADEDOsEI79Kl+AhmOEou6aOx32/kntofp1Hvc/6pHilVAWq2OMJj6Un2XIsWKg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:3498:b0:525:448a:de0 with SMTP id cp24-20020a056a00349800b00525448a0de0mr5892554pfb.85.1656439040742; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 10:57:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([121.167.227.144]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n24-20020a170902969800b0016a034ae481sm9610429plp.176.2022.06.28.10.57.19 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 28 Jun 2022 10:57:20 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Tejun Heo Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 02:57:17 +0900 From: Tejun Heo To: Josh Don Cc: Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Juri Lelli , Vincent Guittot , Dietmar Eggemann , Steven Rostedt , Ben Segall , Mel Gorman , Daniel Bristot de Oliveira , Valentin Schneider , linux-kernel , Cruz Zhao Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] sched/core: add forced idle accounting for cgroups Message-ID: References: <20220621234443.3506529-1-joshdon@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 03:35:21PM -0700, Josh Don wrote: > > Would it make sense to namespace the name to reflect the fact that > > this is tied to core scheduling? e.g. something like > > core.force_idle_usec (and yeah, underscore between words, please). I > > kinda hate that the feature is named "core". The word is so > > overloaded. > > Sure, although a namespace of "core_sched" would be a bit clearer, > since as you point out "core" is pretty overloaded :) Yeah, core_sched is probabaly better and hopefully it'll get better as we get used to the name. > Lack of underscore for forceidle was to be consistent with > "core_forceidle_sum" being dumped from /proc/pid/sched, but I'm fine > with it either way. > > So, > > core_sched.force_idle_usec ? Yeah, that'd be my preference. Thanks. -- tejun