From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: George Dunlap Subject: Re: [PATCH] credit: track residual from divisions done during accounting Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 15:11:09 +0000 Message-ID: <512CD08D.7010504@eu.citrix.com> References: <51222E8302000078000BF1F3@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <512CCE19.8070304@eu.citrix.com> <512CDDC002000078000C11E3@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <512CDDC002000078000C11E3@nat28.tlf.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 02/26/2013 03:07 PM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 26.02.13 at 16:00, George Dunlap wrote: >> On 02/18/2013 12:37 PM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> This should help with under-accounting of vCPU-s running for extremly >>> short periods of time, but becoming runnable again at a high frequency. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich >> >> The changes to credit1 look good, and I'm fine with a patch having those >> (and a commented ASSERT) go in. >> >> Credit2 I'm not so happy with, because the names "t2c" and "c2t" imply >> (at least to me) that they are only converting, not changing anything; >> particularly in the way that t2c is called. At the moment everything >> will work fine, but it's just laying a trap for someone in the future. :-) >> >> I've got a patch in my queue dealing with this section already -- why >> don't you apply just the sched_credit.c part of the patch, and I'll take >> the credit2 part of your patch and rework it so it satisfies me. > > That's fine with me of course. > > May I take the above as a pre-ack to a patch modified accordingly? Yes, I suppose that's fine. :-) -George