From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@linaro.org>
Cc: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
tglx@linutronix.de, rafael@kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [RFC V2 2/2] sched: idle: IRQ based next prediction for idle period
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 19:44:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160120184414.GQ6357@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.20.1601201212170.2140@knanqh.ubzr>
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:46:48PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > +struct stats {
> > + u64 sum; /* sum of values */
> > + u32 values[STATS_NR_VALUES]; /* array of values */
> > + unsigned char w_ptr; /* current window pointer */
>
> Why did you change this from an unsigned int?
>
> This won't provide any memory space saving given that the structure has
> to be padded up to the next 64-bit boundary.
Not to mention that loading bytes is more expensive on many archs
compared to full words.
Also, its not a pointer, its an index.
So: unsigned int w_idx;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-20 18:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-06 15:22 [RFC PATCH 0/2] IRQ based next prediction Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-06 15:22 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] irq: Add a framework to measure interrupt timings Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-08 15:31 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-12 11:42 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-06 15:22 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] sched: idle: IRQ based next prediction for idle period Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-06 17:40 ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-01-07 15:42 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-12 19:27 ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-01-10 22:37 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-10 22:46 ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-01-10 22:58 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-10 23:13 ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-01-08 15:43 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-12 12:41 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-12 13:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-12 14:16 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-12 14:26 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-12 14:52 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-12 15:12 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-12 16:04 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-13 9:17 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-18 13:21 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-20 15:41 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-20 16:00 ` [RFC V2 0/2] IRQ based next prediction Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-20 16:00 ` [RFC V2 1/2] irq: Add a framework to measure interrupt timings Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-20 17:55 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-21 9:25 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-21 10:27 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-20 19:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-20 19:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-20 20:04 ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-01-20 20:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-20 20:22 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-21 9:50 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-21 10:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-21 12:38 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-21 20:27 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-21 13:52 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-21 14:19 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-21 18:56 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-22 10:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-21 9:26 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-20 19:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-21 9:53 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-20 16:00 ` [RFC V2 2/2] sched: idle: IRQ based next prediction for idle period Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-20 17:46 ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-01-20 18:44 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2016-01-21 10:03 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-20 19:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-20 19:17 ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-01-20 19:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-20 19:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-20 19:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-20 19:57 ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-01-20 20:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-20 19:49 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-21 13:54 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-21 14:12 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-20 16:00 ` [RFC V2 0/2] IRQ based next prediction Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-20 16:00 ` [RFC V2 1/2] irq: Add a framework to measure interrupt timings Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-20 16:00 ` [RFC V2 2/2] sched: idle: IRQ based next prediction for idle period Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-20 20:14 ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-01-21 13:04 ` Daniel Lezcano
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160120184414.GQ6357@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nicolas.pitre@linaro.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.