Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753285AbXLFOmq (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Dec 2007 09:42:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751226AbXLFOmi (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Dec 2007 09:42:38 -0500 Received: from palinux.external.hp.com ([192.25.206.14]:49054 "EHLO mail.parisc-linux.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751351AbXLFOmi (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Dec 2007 09:42:38 -0500 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2007 07:42:36 -0700 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Ingo Molnar Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] Use macros instead of TASK_ flags Message-ID: <20071206144236.GB15868@parisc-linux.org> References: <11932286982175-git-send-email-matthew@wil.cx> <1193228698799-git-send-email-matthew@wil.cx> <20071205125622.GA21531@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071205125622.GA21531@elte.hu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1614 Lines: 39 On Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 01:56:22PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > 1) please change 'is' and 'task' around so that it reads nicer: > > if (task_is_stopped(t)) > > instead of the tongue-twister: > > if (is_task_stopped(t)) Sure, no problem. I vacillated on this order myself. > 2) please change task_is_loadavg() to something more sensible - i didnt > know what it meant when i first saw it in -mm's sched.c. > task_is_uninterruptible() would be the logical choice ... It's not obvious to me that "can't be interrupted by a signal" is the same thing as "contributes to loadavg". Indeed, I think we would all like to see a day where there's no such thing as an uninterruptible sleep, but we'll still want at least some of those tasks contributing to loadavg. You're right that task_is_loadavg() doesn't make much sense. task_contributes_to_load() is a better name, but only marginally. I've considered task_performing_io(), and name the corresponding bit __TASK_PERFORMING_IO (or even just __TASK_DOING_IO or __TASK_IO), but it's not just doing IO that makes a task contribute to loadavg. I have no good suggestions here ;-( -- Intel are signing my paycheques ... these opinions are still mine "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step." -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/