Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 15:16:26 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
        Juri Lelli <Juri.Lelli@arm.com>,
        Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: fair: Improve PELT decay_load calculation comments
Message-ID: <20170322141626.isj3dlrimppwq2xv@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20170310202341.11449-1-joelaf@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170310202341.11449-1-joelaf@google.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 447
Lines: 12

On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 12:23:41PM -0800, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> The PELT decay_load comments are a bit confusing, first of all
> the 1/2^N should be (1/2)^N so that the reader doesn't get confused.

I'm thinking you're confused. They're identical.

(1/2)^N = (2^-1)^N = 2^-N = 1/2^N

> Secondly, the y^N splitting into a 2-part decay factor deserves
> a better explanation. This patch improves the comments.

I find its actually harder to read.