From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754910Ab2DWMWx (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 23 Apr 2012 08:22:53 -0400
Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:40843 "EHLO
	merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1754100Ab2DWMWv convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 23 Apr 2012 08:22:51 -0400
Message-ID: <1335183740.28150.135.camel@twins>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/16] sched: SCHED_DEADLINE policy implementation.
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@gmail.com>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
        cfriesen@nortel.com, oleg@redhat.com, fweisbec@gmail.com,
        darren@dvhart.com, johan.eker@ericsson.com, p.faure@akatech.ch,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, claudio@evidence.eu.com,
        michael@amarulasolutions.com, fchecconi@gmail.com,
        tommaso.cucinotta@sssup.it, nicola.manica@disi.unitn.it,
        luca.abeni@unitn.it, dhaval.giani@gmail.com, hgu1972@gmail.com,
        paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, raistlin@linux.it, insop.song@ericsson.com,
        liming.wang@windriver.com
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 14:22:20 +0200
In-Reply-To: <4F954757.3020003@gmail.com>
References: <1333696481-3433-1-git-send-email-juri.lelli@gmail.com>
	  <1333696481-3433-6-git-send-email-juri.lelli@gmail.com>
	 <1335180743.28150.119.camel@twins> <4F954757.3020003@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2- 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, 2012-04-23 at 14:13 +0200, Juri Lelli wrote:
> On 04/23/2012 01:32 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-04-06 at 09:14 +0200, Juri Lelli wrote:
> >> +       /*
> >> +        * We Keep moving the deadline away until we get some
> >> +        * available runtime for the entity. This ensures correct
> >> +        * handling of situations where the runtime overrun is
> >> +        * arbitrary large.
> >> +        */
> >> +       while (dl_se->runtime<= 0) {
> >> +               dl_se->deadline += dl_se->dl_deadline;
> >> +               dl_se->runtime += dl_se->dl_runtime;
> >> +       }
> >
> > Does gcc 'optimize' that into a division? If so, it might need special
> > glue to make it not do that.
> 
> I got two adds and a jle, no div here..

Gcc is known to change such loops to something like:

 if (runtime <= 0) {
   tmp = 1 - runtime / dl_runtime;
   deadline += tmp * dl_deadline;
   runtime += tmp * dl_runtime;
 }