Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754505Ab3EFPDB (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 May 2013 11:03:01 -0400 Received: from mga14.intel.com ([143.182.124.37]:43332 "EHLO mga14.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754031Ab3EFPDA (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 May 2013 11:03:00 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,622,1363158000"; d="scan'208";a="237520876" Message-ID: <5187C616.4070503@intel.com> Date: Mon, 06 May 2013 23:02:46 +0800 From: Alex Shi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120912 Thunderbird/15.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Turner CC: Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , Andrew Morton , Borislav Petkov , Namhyung Kim , Mike Galbraith , Morten Rasmussen , Vincent Guittot , Preeti U Murthy , Viresh Kumar , LKML , Mel Gorman , Rik van Riel , Michael Wang Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/7] sched: remove SMP cover for runnable variables in cfs_rq References: <1367804711-30308-1-git-send-email-alex.shi@intel.com> <1367804711-30308-3-git-send-email-alex.shi@intel.com> <5187708A.20103@intel.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1334 Lines: 41 On 05/06/2013 05:08 PM, Paul Turner wrote: > On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 1:57 AM, Alex Shi wrote: >> On 05/06/2013 04:01 PM, Paul Turner wrote: >>> On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 6:45 PM, Alex Shi wrote: >>>> The following variables were covered under CONFIG_SMP in struct cfs_rq. >>>> but similar runnable variables work for UP in struct rq and task_group. >>>> like rq->avg, task_group->load_avg. >>>> So move them out, they also can work with UP. >>> >>> Is there a proposed use-case for UP? My apologies if I missed it in >>> an alternate patch. >> >>> It would seem the only possibly useful thing there would the the >>> per-rq average for p-state selection; but we can get that without the >>> per-entity values already. >> >> >> Do you mean to move the rq->avg and task_group->load_avg into CONFIG_SMP? > > More generally: Why do we need them in !CONFIG_SMP? > > [ I was suggesting (potentially) using only rq->avg in the !CONFIG_SMP case. ] Thanks for comments. I will look into this. :) > > >> >> -- >> Thanks >> Alex -- Thanks Alex -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/