* luca abeni <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: Luca Abeni <[email protected]>
>
> Active utilization is defined as the total utilization of active
> (TASK_RUNNING) tasks queued on a runqueue. Hence, it is increased
> when a task wakes up and is decreased when a task blocks.
>
> When a task is migrated from CPUi to CPUj, immediately subtract the
> task's utilization from CPUi and add it to CPUj. This mechanism is
> implemented by modifying the pull and push functions.
> Note: this is not fully correct from the theoretical point of view
> (the utilization should be removed from CPUi only at the 0 lag
> time), a more theoretically sound solution is presented in the
> next patches.
>
> Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Luca Abeni <[email protected]>
> Tested-by: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <[email protected]>
So that SOB chain is not valid - either Juri needs to be the From: author, or it
should be an Acked-by (or Reviewed-by).
For now I've converted this to:
> Signed-off-by: Luca Abeni <[email protected]>
> Acked-by: Juri Lelli <[email protected]>
Please holler if you'd like something else.
Thanks,
Ingo
On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:31:25 +0200
Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> wrote:
> * luca abeni <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > From: Luca Abeni <[email protected]>
> >
> > Active utilization is defined as the total utilization of active
> > (TASK_RUNNING) tasks queued on a runqueue. Hence, it is increased
> > when a task wakes up and is decreased when a task blocks.
> >
> > When a task is migrated from CPUi to CPUj, immediately subtract the
> > task's utilization from CPUi and add it to CPUj. This mechanism is
> > implemented by modifying the pull and push functions.
> > Note: this is not fully correct from the theoretical point of view
> > (the utilization should be removed from CPUi only at the 0 lag
> > time), a more theoretically sound solution is presented in the
> > next patches.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Luca Abeni <[email protected]>
> > Tested-by: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <[email protected]>
>
> So that SOB chain is not valid - either Juri needs to be the From:
> author, or it should be an Acked-by (or Reviewed-by).
>
> For now I've converted this to:
>
> > Signed-off-by: Luca Abeni <[email protected]>
> > Acked-by: Juri Lelli <[email protected]>
Sorry, my fault: I must have misunderstood how to use the Signed-off-by
stuff.
The story here is that I took a patch originally developed by Juri and
fixed and I heavily modified it. Since the current patch is very
different from the original one, Juri suggested I should by the "From:"
author, and I simply added his Signed-off-by to acknowledge that he was
the author of the original patch.
If Juri is ok with your change, I agree with it.
Thanks,
Luca
On 08/06/17 10:43, Luca Abeni wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:31:25 +0200
> Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > * luca abeni <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > From: Luca Abeni <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > Active utilization is defined as the total utilization of active
> > > (TASK_RUNNING) tasks queued on a runqueue. Hence, it is increased
> > > when a task wakes up and is decreased when a task blocks.
> > >
> > > When a task is migrated from CPUi to CPUj, immediately subtract the
> > > task's utilization from CPUi and add it to CPUj. This mechanism is
> > > implemented by modifying the pull and push functions.
> > > Note: this is not fully correct from the theoretical point of view
> > > (the utilization should be removed from CPUi only at the 0 lag
> > > time), a more theoretically sound solution is presented in the
> > > next patches.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <[email protected]>
> > > Signed-off-by: Luca Abeni <[email protected]>
> > > Tested-by: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <[email protected]>
> >
> > So that SOB chain is not valid - either Juri needs to be the From:
> > author, or it should be an Acked-by (or Reviewed-by).
> >
> > For now I've converted this to:
> >
> > > Signed-off-by: Luca Abeni <[email protected]>
> > > Acked-by: Juri Lelli <[email protected]>
>
> Sorry, my fault: I must have misunderstood how to use the Signed-off-by
> stuff.
>
> The story here is that I took a patch originally developed by Juri and
> fixed and I heavily modified it. Since the current patch is very
> different from the original one, Juri suggested I should by the "From:"
> author, and I simply added his Signed-off-by to acknowledge that he was
> the author of the original patch.
>
> If Juri is ok with your change, I agree with it.
>
Yep, I'm OK with Ingo's solution.
Thanks,
- Juri
On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:05:55 +0100
Juri Lelli <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 08/06/17 10:43, Luca Abeni wrote:
> > On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:31:25 +0200
> > Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > * luca abeni <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > From: Luca Abeni <[email protected]>
> > > >
> > > > Active utilization is defined as the total utilization of active
> > > > (TASK_RUNNING) tasks queued on a runqueue. Hence, it is increased
> > > > when a task wakes up and is decreased when a task blocks.
> > > >
> > > > When a task is migrated from CPUi to CPUj, immediately subtract the
> > > > task's utilization from CPUi and add it to CPUj. This mechanism is
> > > > implemented by modifying the pull and push functions.
> > > > Note: this is not fully correct from the theoretical point of view
> > > > (the utilization should be removed from CPUi only at the 0 lag
> > > > time), a more theoretically sound solution is presented in the
> > > > next patches.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <[email protected]>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Luca Abeni <[email protected]>
> > > > Tested-by: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > So that SOB chain is not valid - either Juri needs to be the From:
> > > author, or it should be an Acked-by (or Reviewed-by).
> > >
> > > For now I've converted this to:
> > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Luca Abeni <[email protected]>
> > > > Acked-by: Juri Lelli <[email protected]>
> >
> > Sorry, my fault: I must have misunderstood how to use the Signed-off-by
> > stuff.
> >
> > The story here is that I took a patch originally developed by Juri and
> > fixed and I heavily modified it. Since the current patch is very
> > different from the original one, Juri suggested I should by the "From:"
> > author, and I simply added his Signed-off-by to acknowledge that he was
> > the author of the original patch.
> >
> > If Juri is ok with your change, I agree with it.
> >
>
> Yep, I'm OK with Ingo's solution.
>
Although, since the code originally came from you a Signed-off-by is
appropriate. The SOB is a chain of where the patch came from. As Juri
actually has part ownership, Juri should have a signed-off-by on the
patch. The problem with git is that it allows for multiple signed off
bys but only one owner.
-- Steve
On 08/06/17 09:36, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:05:55 +0100
> Juri Lelli <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On 08/06/17 10:43, Luca Abeni wrote:
> > > On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:31:25 +0200
> > > Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > * luca abeni <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > From: Luca Abeni <[email protected]>
> > > > >
> > > > > Active utilization is defined as the total utilization of active
> > > > > (TASK_RUNNING) tasks queued on a runqueue. Hence, it is increased
> > > > > when a task wakes up and is decreased when a task blocks.
> > > > >
> > > > > When a task is migrated from CPUi to CPUj, immediately subtract the
> > > > > task's utilization from CPUi and add it to CPUj. This mechanism is
> > > > > implemented by modifying the pull and push functions.
> > > > > Note: this is not fully correct from the theoretical point of view
> > > > > (the utilization should be removed from CPUi only at the 0 lag
> > > > > time), a more theoretically sound solution is presented in the
> > > > > next patches.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <[email protected]>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Luca Abeni <[email protected]>
> > > > > Tested-by: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <[email protected]>
> > > >
> > > > So that SOB chain is not valid - either Juri needs to be the From:
> > > > author, or it should be an Acked-by (or Reviewed-by).
> > > >
> > > > For now I've converted this to:
> > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Luca Abeni <[email protected]>
> > > > > Acked-by: Juri Lelli <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > Sorry, my fault: I must have misunderstood how to use the Signed-off-by
> > > stuff.
> > >
> > > The story here is that I took a patch originally developed by Juri and
> > > fixed and I heavily modified it. Since the current patch is very
> > > different from the original one, Juri suggested I should by the "From:"
> > > author, and I simply added his Signed-off-by to acknowledge that he was
> > > the author of the original patch.
> > >
> > > If Juri is ok with your change, I agree with it.
> > >
> >
> > Yep, I'm OK with Ingo's solution.
> >
>
> Although, since the code originally came from you a Signed-off-by is
> appropriate. The SOB is a chain of where the patch came from. As Juri
> actually has part ownership, Juri should have a signed-off-by on the
> patch. The problem with git is that it allows for multiple signed off
> bys but only one owner.
>
Right. I've been also using Co-authored-by: in some other set, but I
don't think it's actually documented anywhere. :/
Anyway, not a big deal in this particular case. :)
Thanks,
- Juri