Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 3 Jun 2019 13:29:29 +0100
From:   Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>
To:     Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
        Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
        Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
        Todd Kjos <tkjos@google.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>,
        Steve Muckle <smuckle@google.com>,
        Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 12/16] sched/core: uclamp: Extend CPU's cgroup
 controller
Message-ID: <20190603122929.GC19426@darkstar>
References: <20190515094459.10317-1-patrick.bellasi@arm.com>
 <20190515094459.10317-13-patrick.bellasi@arm.com>
 <20190531153545.GE374014@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190531153545.GE374014@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 31-May 08:35, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Patrick.
> 
> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 10:44:55AM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote:

[...]

> For proportions (as opposed to weights), we use percentage rational
> numbers - e.g. 38.44 for 38.44%.  I have parser and doc update commits
> pending.  I'll put them on cgroup/for-5.3.

That's a point worth discussing with Peter, we already changed one
time from percentages to 1024 scale.

Utilization clamps are expressed as percentages by definition,
they are just expressed in a convenient 1024 scale which should not be
alien to people using those knobs.

If we wanna use a "more specific" name like uclamp.{min,max} then we
should probably also accept to use a "more specific" metric, don't we?

I personally like the [0..1024] range, but I guess that's really up to
you and Peter to agree upon.

> Thanks.
> 
> --
> tejun

Cheers,
Patrick

-- 
#include <best/regards.h>

Patrick Bellasi