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:   Thu, 6 Jul 2023 16:40:59 -0700
From:   Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
To:     Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com>,
        "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>,
        Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
        Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>,
        Zhao Liu <zhao1.liu@intel.com>,
        "Yuan, Perry" <Perry.Yuan@amd.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
        "Tim C . Chen" <tim.c.chen@intel.com>,
        Zhao Liu <zhao1.liu@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 06/24] sched/fair: Collect load-balancing stats for
 IPC classes
Message-ID: <20230706234058.GC12259@ranerica-svr.sc.intel.com>
References: <20230613042422.5344-1-ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
 <20230613042422.5344-7-ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
 <ZJQN/KIwCUmzYoiN@arm.com>
 <20230624000121.GA32639@ranerica-svr.sc.intel.com>
 <d211d4dedd79330412e71a8b9b4b599cfe0fc80c.camel@linux.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <d211d4dedd79330412e71a8b9b4b599cfe0fc80c.camel@linux.intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 12:52:59PM -0700, Tim Chen wrote:
> 
> > > 
> > > nit: the comment is unnecessary, and a bit misleading, IMO.
> > > 
> > > The comment says "This group will not be selected." but the only way to
> > > guarantee that here is to reset the sum_score to 0 when you find an
> > > invalid score, which I don't believe is your intention.
> > 
> > You raise an interesting point. We will call this function for each rq
> > in the sched group. Thus, if we encounter an error, the scores would be
> > incomplete. Therefore, I think that the scores should be discarded and
> > reset to 0 so that they are not used, IMO.
> 
> Since we still have other rqs to loop through, reset to 0 here does
> not guarantee that it will stay that way at the end of the loop when
> the sum could still be added to.

That is true, to discard the would need an indication that we should not
keep iterating on the runqueues of this group.

> May need a special value like -EINVAL
> and make the score a "long" to mark such case.

IIUC, unsigned longs allow to handle negative errors if you use
IS_ERR_VALUE(); but yes, it looks odd.