LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Rearrange select_task_rq_fair() to optimize it
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 10:39:09 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180425093909.GI14391@e108498-lin.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180425090327.7mwm2pdheeptz6sd@vireshk-i7>

On Wednesday 25 Apr 2018 at 14:33:27 (+0530), Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 25-04-18, 09:13, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > While you're at it, you could probably remove the one in wake_cap() ? I
> > think having just one in select_task_rq_fair() should be enough.
> 
> Just make it clear, you are asking me to remove sync_entity_load_avg()
> in wake_cap() ? But aren't we required to do that, as in the very next
> line we call task_util(p) ?

Right, we do need to call sync_entity_load_avg() at some point before
calling task_util(), but we don't need to re-call it in strf()
after in this case. So my point was just that if you want to re-work
the wake-up path and make sure we don't call sync_entity_load_avg()
if not needed then this might need fixing as well ... Or maybe we don't
care since re-calling sync_entity_load_avg() should be really cheap ...

  reply	other threads:[~2018-04-25  9:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-04-23 10:38 Viresh Kumar
2018-04-24 10:02 ` Valentin Schneider
2018-04-24 10:30   ` Viresh Kumar
2018-04-24 10:43   ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-24 11:19     ` Valentin Schneider
2018-04-24 12:35       ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-24 15:46         ` Joel Fernandes
2018-04-24 15:47           ` Joel Fernandes
2018-04-24 22:34             ` Rohit Jain
2018-04-25  2:51               ` Viresh Kumar
2018-04-25 16:48                 ` Rohit Jain
2018-04-25  5:15         ` Viresh Kumar
2018-04-25  8:13           ` Quentin Perret
2018-04-25  9:03             ` Viresh Kumar
2018-04-25  9:39               ` Quentin Perret [this message]
2018-04-25 10:13                 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-04-25 10:55                   ` Quentin Perret
2018-04-25  8:12         ` Quentin Perret

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=20180425093909.GI14391@e108498-lin.cambridge.arm.com \
    --to=quentin.perret@arm.com \
    --cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Rearrange select_task_rq_fair() to optimize it' \
    /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

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).