Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757244Ab0KJWSJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Nov 2010 17:18:09 -0500 Received: from ms01.sssup.it ([193.205.80.99]:49992 "EHLO sssup.it" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756610Ab0KJWSH (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Nov 2010 17:18:07 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 718 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 17:18:06 EST Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 02/22] sched: add extended scheduling interface From: Raistlin To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Steven Rostedt , Chris Friesen , oleg@redhat.com, Frederic Weisbecker , Darren Hart , Johan Eker , "p.faure" , linux-kernel , Claudio Scordino , michael trimarchi , Fabio Checconi , Tommaso Cucinotta , Juri Lelli , Nicola Manica , Luca Abeni , Dhaval Giani , Harald Gustafsson , paulmck In-Reply-To: <1289410114.2084.23.camel@laptop> References: <1288333128.8661.137.camel@Palantir> <1288333622.8661.141.camel@Palantir> <1289410114.2084.23.camel@laptop> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-wEBHLMvTCtru36+JakIz" Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 23:17:56 +0100 Message-ID: <1289427476.13577.285.camel@Palantir> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2207 Lines: 73 --=-wEBHLMvTCtru36+JakIz Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 18:28 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 08:27 +0200, Raistlin wrote: > > +struct sched_param_ex { > > + int sched_priority; > > + struct timespec sched_runtime; > > + struct timespec sched_deadline; > > + struct timespec sched_period; > > + unsigned int sched_flags; > > + > > + struct timespec curr_runtime; > > + struct timespec used_runtime; > > + struct timespec curr_deadline; > > +};=20 >=20 > It would be better for alignment reasons to move the sched_flags field > next to the sched_priority field. >=20 Makes sense, thanks. :-) > I would suggest we add at least one more field so we can implement the > stochastic model from UNC, sched_runtime_dev or sched_runtime_var or > somesuch. >=20 Ok, no problem with that too. BTW, as Dhaval was suggesting, are (after those changes) fine with this new sched_param? Do we need some further mechanism to grant its extendability? Padding? Versioning? void *data field? Whatever? :-O I'd like very much to have some discussion here, if you think it is needed, in hope of avoiding future ABI issues as much as possible! :-P Thanks, Dario --=20 <> (Raistlin Majere) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dario Faggioli, ReTiS Lab, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pisa (Italy) http://blog.linux.it/raistlin / raistlin@ekiga.net / dario.faggioli@jabber.org --=-wEBHLMvTCtru36+JakIz Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAkzbGhQACgkQk4XaBE3IOsQ90QCfRP8NzibPzbGbQnAf+G3VSHMq TfcAnj/RosjA+99NqI619zqRfZgaqb0J =1jaT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-wEBHLMvTCtru36+JakIz-- -- 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/