Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 25 Jun 2021 10:20:54 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Josh Don <joshdon@google.com>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
        Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
        Oleg Rombakh <olegrom@google.com>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
        Steve Sistare <steven.sistare@oracle.com>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: cgroup SCHED_IDLE support
Message-ID: <YNWR5qgkAxzLtUKK@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20210608231132.32012-1-joshdon@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210608231132.32012-1-joshdon@google.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 04:11:32PM -0700, Josh Don wrote:
> +static int se_is_idle(struct sched_entity *se)
> +{
> +	if (entity_is_task(se))
> +		return task_has_idle_policy(task_of(se));
> +	return cfs_rq_is_idle(group_cfs_rq(se));
> +}

I'm conflicted on this, on the one hand, since we want 'idle' to be a
sched_entity propery, I'd say, make it a sched_entity field, OTOH,
that's probably going to be a mess too :/

Let me read more..