Received: by 2002:a25:7ec1:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id z184csp2745041ybc; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 03:31:47 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzcZN884oTfbGaxHYM8+3OWTzD2ykgm5fJpm5tw4i2B/Oa+SPHKOnYio1jbyJZtk4+jUs7G X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:82d0:: with SMTP id a16mr8809597ejy.206.1574681507859; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 03:31:47 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1574681507; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=R/bZCALsOai7B8TarukFzryE7PQ2fpD0xsnzTGbdSfGybr/Dx/EIlA74sQsfmbwcy2 QPtT5w6PSrifOZbGipn9811Sy4NOiEeAUPPgg3uJ+qtnxNKCHBaMjqvxjIC9nyF1dh9P n4BZPmxl1h4U4I6F8vp4Z7J1z27JBnPLbhrKv4kj1maOT3lw7RGvkWPKnz3fc9fyuFHZ Y3WpnPGbldCYIyqABtqSZgwcK7l58xcYt+zvkmajUyrv2a6yR+RkZjIJlpnUBPjsYns8 6Nvg+ggZ4k+Q8XB87KEqpvxaKRrz5hTyfRPehunZFVgDA9a+dJA4rLbJk8QS7EQfBwaa l+YQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding :content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :message-id:from:references:cc:to:subject; bh=Z2BtJ9VGNQVPCHlc8lWKd9lbkXcelM8KqttjITqcnus=; b=GohDx32GPDukxRr8QtkBRS0ojOri/za6EocI6L7LV1IBdxPlTDzmhLOh7qzfD5uzWI K5b1PvLHNwo81rcwNMSDM5inn7qZd5ebld4QKhDmRI05HB+vLGAy4OOoCcr5sETP50de mbL5MgXriWbKxw9OPiOosI3Dk8456KBkBfeAoxoBmCpjW0FnUdG2lYPKqXRW7EDYqnJe g/nTnKqst9iQwKek1MD3LVuho3e7LVzuaKrIuXI3AH6u7RPgdv3wN5e2LuRIwQnDdF+3 kq4qunkOUBCrFDjcgiQ/kbh5wO6fa+5wS4we3P4Vwk/XofY8XtgAiFc5Wudj5ydCeEuR sOcQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id z16si5068339edd.314.2019.11.25.03.31.24; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 03:31:47 -0800 (PST) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727638AbfKYLDm (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 25 Nov 2019 06:03:42 -0500 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:48566 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727278AbfKYLDm (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Nov 2019 06:03:42 -0500 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD46431B; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 03:03:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.1.194.37] (e113632-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.194.37]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 52BDF3F52E; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 03:03:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: fix rework of find_idlest_group() To: Vincent Guittot Cc: linux-kernel , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Phil Auld , Srikar Dronamraju , Quentin Perret , Dietmar Eggemann , Morten Rasmussen , Hillf Danton , Parth Shah , Rik van Riel , kernel test robot References: <1571405198-27570-12-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org> <1571762798-25900-1-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org> <2bb75047-4a93-4f1d-e2ff-99c499b5a070@arm.com> From: Valentin Schneider Message-ID: <08220a1c-5f31-75ff-4f07-25c45ccc8a14@arm.com> Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 11:03:39 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 25/11/2019 09:16, Vincent Guittot wrote: > > This is an extension of idle_cpu which also returns int and I wanted > to stay consistent with it > > So we might want to make some kind of cleanup or rewording of > interfaces and their descriptions but this should be done as a whole > and out of the scope of this patch and would worth having a dedicated > patch IMO because it would imply to modify other patch of the code > that is not covered by this patch like idle_cpu or cpu_util_without > Fair enough.