Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-135295-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2024 14:00:45 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@bytedance.com>
Cc: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>, Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@intel.com>,
	Tiwei Bie <tiwei.btw@antgroup.com>,
	Honglei Wang <wanghonglei@didichuxing.com>,
	Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>, Chen Yu <yu.chen.surf@gmail.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] sched/eevdf: Return leftmost entity in pick_eevdf()
 if no eligible entity is found
Message-ID: <20240408120045.GG21904@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20240226082349.302363-1-yu.c.chen@intel.com>
 <758ebf4e-ee84-414b-99ec-182537bcc168@bytedance.com>
 <ZeF+uc/jMohokNRb@chenyu5-mobl2>
 <63102e0a-8a16-4b1d-b8f8-d9833079c924@bytedance.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <63102e0a-8a16-4b1d-b8f8-d9833079c924@bytedance.com>

On Fri, Mar 01, 2024 at 04:42:43PM +0800, Abel Wu wrote:

> After a second thought, this doesn't solve the insane huge vruntime
> itself. Since the immediate problem is that 'huge' number actually is
> a small one, is it possible to make vruntime s64 at definition?

In part that was never done because wrapping of signed types in C is UB
and UBSAN used to be buggy. But also, given how it all works, it mostly
doesn't matter.