Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 26 Sep 2022 14:53:38 -0700
From:   Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
To:     Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Cc:     "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri@intel.com>,
        "Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
        Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
        Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
        Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Tim C . Chen" <tim.c.chen@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 03/23] sched/core: Initialize the class of a new task
Message-ID: <20220926215338.GA5529@ranerica-svr.sc.intel.com>
References: <20220909231205.14009-1-ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
 <20220909231205.14009-4-ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
 <YzG92YDyBK/0W+5u@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YzG92YDyBK/0W+5u@google.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 02:57:29PM +0000, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> Hi Ricardo,
> 
> On Fri, Sep 09, 2022 at 04:11:45PM -0700, Ricardo Neri wrote:
> > New tasks shall start life as unclassified. They will be classified by
> > hardware when they run.
> > 
> > Cc: Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>
> > Cc: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>
> > Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
> > Cc: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
> > Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
> > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> > Cc: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
> > Cc: Tim C. Chen <tim.c.chen@intel.com>
> > Cc: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
> > Cc: x86@kernel.org
> > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> >  kernel/sched/core.c | 3 +++
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > index ee28253c9ac0..db548c1a25ef 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > @@ -4336,6 +4336,9 @@ static void __sched_fork(unsigned long clone_flags, struct task_struct *p)
> >  	p->se.prev_sum_exec_runtime	= 0;
> >  	p->se.nr_migrations		= 0;
> >  	p->se.vruntime			= 0;
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_TASK_CLASSES
> > +	p->class			= TASK_CLASS_UNCLASSIFIED;
> > +#endif
> 
> I find the term 'class' very broad and unclear what kind of class (without
> further reading). So I am worried about how this generic term usage plays
> with Linux source code in the long-term (like what if someone else comes up
> with a usage of term 'class' that is unrelated to IPC.)

Thank you very much for your review Joel! Yes, class seems too generic. It is
meant to read, for instance, task_struct::class or p->class, or rq->current->
class. This should imply that we are referring to the class of a task. But yes,
I agree that it is too generic.

> 
> To that end, I was wondering if it could be renamed to p->ipc_class, and
> CONFIG_SCHED_TASK_IPC_CLASSES, or something.

This is a good suggestion. I will take it, unless others disagree.

BR,
Ricardo