Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-118497-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1;
Sender: Ingo Molnar <mingo.kernel.org@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2024 08:58:28 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, yu.c.chen@intel.com,
	dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	nysal@linux.ibm.com, aboorvad@linux.ibm.com, srikar@linux.ibm.com,
	vschneid@redhat.com, pierre.gondois@arm.com, qyousef@layalina.io
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/3] sched/fair: Combine EAS check with overutilized
 access
Message-ID: <ZgKAJAiAM61MLPBN@gmail.com>
References: <20240307085725.444486-1-sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
 <20240307085725.444486-4-sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240307085725.444486-4-sshegde@linux.ibm.com>


* Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com> wrote:

>  /*
> - * Ensure that caller can do EAS. overutilized value
> - * make sense only if EAS is enabled
> + * overutilized value make sense only if EAS is enabled
>   */
> -static inline int is_rd_overutilized(struct root_domain *rd)
> +static inline int is_rd_not_overutilized(struct root_domain *rd)
>  {
> -	return READ_ONCE(rd->overutilized);
> +	return sched_energy_enabled() && !READ_ONCE(rd->overutilized);
>  }

While adding the sched_energy_enabled() condition looks OK, the _not prefix 
This is silly: putting logical operators into functions names is far less 
readable than a !fn()...

> -	if (!is_rd_overutilized(rq->rd) && cpu_overutilized(rq->cpu))
> +	if (is_rd_not_overutilized(rq->rd) && cpu_overutilized(rq->cpu))

Especially since we already have cpu_overutilized(). It's far more coherent 
to have the same basic attribute functions and put any negation into 
*actual* logical operators.

Thanks,

	Ingo