From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933743Ab3BTIy2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Feb 2013 03:54:28 -0500 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:24628 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933556Ab3BTIy0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Feb 2013 03:54:26 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,699,1355126400"; d="scan'208";a="293470691" Message-ID: <51248F59.2060900@intel.com> Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 16:54:49 +0800 From: Alex Shi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120912 Thunderbird/15.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mike Galbraith CC: peterz@infradead.org, Joonsoo Kim , torvalds@linux-foundation.org, mingo@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, akpm@linux-foundation.org, arjan@linux.intel.com, bp@alien8.de, pjt@google.com, namhyung@kernel.org, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com, viresh.kumar@linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, morten.rasmussen@arm.com Subject: Re: [patch v5 10/15] sched: packing transitory tasks in wake/exec power balancing References: <1361164062-20111-1-git-send-email-alex.shi@intel.com> <1361164062-20111-11-git-send-email-alex.shi@intel.com> <20130218084439.GB10009@lge.com> <5121ECD9.3020300@intel.com> <5124654E.8040001@intel.com> <1361346030.5919.63.camel@marge.simpson.net> <51248541.3030004@intel.com> <1361349823.5919.78.camel@marge.simpson.net> In-Reply-To: <1361349823.5919.78.camel@marge.simpson.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 02/20/2013 04:43 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote: >> > >> > Sounds reasonable too. >> > >> > I have no idea of the of the decision now. >> > And guess many guys dislike to use a knob to let user do the choice. > Nobody likes seeing yet more knobs much, automagical is preferred. > Trouble with automagical heuristics usage is that any heuristic will > inevitably get it wrong sometimes, so giving the user control over usage > is IMHO a good thing.. and once we give the user the choice, we must > honor it, else what was the point? > > Anyway, fwiw, I liked what I saw test driving the patch set.. > >> > What's your opinions, Peter? > ..but maintainer opinions carry more weight than mine, even to me ;-) :) Yes, maintainers usually heard enough arguments and can balance them... -- Thanks Alex