From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932939AbaJVK3F (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Oct 2014 06:29:05 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:38050 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932098AbaJVK3D (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Oct 2014 06:29:03 -0400 Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 12:28:57 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Yuyang Du Cc: mingo@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pjt@google.com, bsegall@google.com, arjan.van.de.ven@intel.com, len.brown@intel.com, rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, alan.cox@intel.com, mark.gross@intel.com, fengguang.wu@intel.com, morten.rasmussen@arm.com Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH 2/3 v5] sched: Rewrite per entity runnable load average tracking Message-ID: <20141022102857.GH12706@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <1412907717-2871-1-git-send-email-yuyang.du@intel.com> <1412907717-2871-3-git-send-email-yuyang.du@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1412907717-2871-3-git-send-email-yuyang.du@intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22.1 (2013-10-16) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org So I would really like to hear from others on this, as it stands I tend to rather like this code -- and it removes a fair amount of icky lines of code. That said, it does change semantics slightly in that it removes the blocked/runnable split and last time we added the blocked component to the load balancer we had regressions -- now Yuyand and Wu ran this through some testing (AIM7 iirc) and didn't see horrid, but I can't quite remember where we saw the biggest fail back when. Also, Morten is a little worried about changing all this code seeing how the existing stuff has proven itself over the past few years and feels its somewhat understood. Then again, going by that we'd never change anything. Ben, Paul, can you guys give this a go?