From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 52BBC199249 for ; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 16:14:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1737130493; cv=none; b=Zv1vf/+NorLYDtIHI5TnDLz/bfG5UJ7b7kSPcyu6rKwWTbK59XuZ9ZENnLzf2tPJPoUV20LwZxhfm/uDPqKfUm0IEG2eLJ0FWBRXRQbobkcO9Pk/gCcuCw4gR9EEbn57wn9XPLy18lODz2zDuhODMITSmk4dYa5lOSQbEyh6RXc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1737130493; c=relaxed/simple; bh=10xEA8cW2YHE/obmPpF0FZog6qA3XKyix6NxCO6ZGBo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=H7Ss7fJHf6emuBPVYbZFYShmHMAdnZPtogArSE7YsZZzFzkOgIxgroPXsc1EtPmobfBga1U3gxUEXnoFq7Jb5BNIWb4+if4WX/9pNGx2xZCxCncs/iBEueWX4kj90ihilR4LpWmfOT+3Wlod3PsQLYwVFUwV3PMeF7CCXO2hUgo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=ZInIgqvm; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="ZInIgqvm" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C4A34C4CEDD; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 16:14:52 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1737130492; bh=10xEA8cW2YHE/obmPpF0FZog6qA3XKyix6NxCO6ZGBo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=ZInIgqvmWA9YCs5p1fZEZ5KCfSnxMgSZPYovvpKbHc8BP8jw2O1c4jqSZ81ZahWIk 3UFQDHmS/4CNAjz+qZ0HfgxUQFEfqQpJjKNdvziT4AjqFVST77qa/pLCnTZZT3uq50 PkWd5rJAdqadJDeNlSChcVNDPFtdNQ5gCD0VyzZorl1rVV8imUbxgCb4YTTbamX9OP 4iybFQpCJW4HXzQDdteR5fYO2428y3qXqmM053DaRZSH+xzgwrKFvoc/Ngck3Nof7S q3i9Lmp8Evw01g2NbGKOUMVT49Z7pSUxEyIQ0DzxbC5FkmR6rJDeCs6plVchQTeoZu w54ntSFqxGBUg== Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 06:14:51 -1000 From: Tejun Heo To: Changwoo Min Cc: void@manifault.com, arighi@nvidia.com, kernel-dev@igalia.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] sched_ext: Add an event, SCX_EVENT_RQ_BYPASSING_OPS Message-ID: References: <20250116151543.80163-1-changwoo@igalia.com> <20250116151543.80163-6-changwoo@igalia.com> <3b7880c6-2de2-4e68-b247-8c4ace4fc92b@igalia.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3b7880c6-2de2-4e68-b247-8c4ace4fc92b@igalia.com> Hello, On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 04:31:55PM +0900, Changwoo Min wrote: ... > For the number of times the bypassing mode activated, what about > BYPASS_NR_ACTIVATED? > > For the number of task dispatched,what about > BYPASS_NR_TASK_DISPATCHED? Those names are fine but we used simple imperatives for other names, so the followings might be more consistent: - BYPASS_ACTIVATE - BYPASS_DISPATCH > I think BYPASS_NR_ACTIVATED and BYPASS_NR_TASK_DISPATCHED will be > a good proxy for the total duration, so we can skip it until we > have a clear user case. If we need the total duration now (maybe > BYPASS_DURATION?), we can directly measure it in the > scx_ops_bypass() directly. What do you think? I think it'd be a useful counter to have and measuring from scx_ops_bypass() makes sense to me. Thanks. -- tejun