From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: peterz@infradead.org (Peter Zijlstra)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 17:38:26 +0200
Subject: [PATCH v6 5/6] sched: replace capacity_factor by usage
In-Reply-To: <1411488485-10025-6-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
References: <1411488485-10025-1-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
 <1411488485-10025-6-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Message-ID: <20141003153826.GM2849@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 06:08:04PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:

> This implementation of utilization_avg_contrib doesn't solve the scaling
> in-variance problem, so i have to scale the utilization with original
> capacity of the CPU in order to get the CPU usage and compare it with the
> capacity. Once the scaling invariance will have been added in
> utilization_avg_contrib, we will remove the scale of utilization_avg_contrib
> by cpu_capacity_orig in get_cpu_usage. But the scaling invariance will come
> in another patchset.

I would have expected this in the previous patch that introduced that
lot. Including a few words on how/why the cpu_capacity is a 'good'
approximation etc..

> Finally, the sched_group->sched_group_capacity->capacity_orig has been removed
> because it's more used during load balance.

That sentence is a contradiction, I expect there's a negative gone
missing someplace.