Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] sched: increase SCHED_LOAD_SCALE resolution

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Nikhil Rao <ncrao@google.com> wrote:

> +#if BITS_PER_LONG > 32
> +# define SCHED_LOAD_RESOLUTION	10
> +# define scale_load(w)		(w << SCHED_LOAD_RESOLUTION)
> +# define scale_load_down(w)	(w >> SCHED_LOAD_RESOLUTION)
> +#else
> +# define SCHED_LOAD_RESOLUTION	0
> +# define scale_load(w)		(w)
> +# define scale_load_down(w)	(w)
> +#endif

We want (w) in the other definitions as well, to protect potential operators 
with lower precedence than <<. (Roughly half of the C operators are such so 
it's a real issue, should anyone use these macros with operators.)

> +#define SCHED_LOAD_SHIFT	(10 + (SCHED_LOAD_RESOLUTION))

that () is not needed actually, if you look at the definition of 
SCHED_LOAD_RESOLUTION.

So you could move the superfluous () from here up to the two definitions above 
and thus no parentheses would be hurt during the making of this patch.

> +		if (BITS_PER_LONG > 32 && unlikely(w >= WMULT_CONST))
>  			lw->inv_weight = 1;
> +		else if (unlikely(!w))
> +			lw->inv_weight = WMULT_CONST;
>  		else
> +			lw->inv_weight = WMULT_CONST / w;

Ok, i just noticed that you made use of BITS_PER_LONG here too.

It's better to put that into a helper define, something like 
SCHED_LOAD_HIGHRES, which could thus be used like this:

		if (SCHED_LOAD_HIGHRES && unlikely(w >= WMULT_CONST))

then, should anyone want to tweak the condition for SCHED_LOAD_HIGHRES, it 
could be done in a single place. It would also self-document.

Thanks,

	Ingo