Re: [patch v5 11/15] sched: add power/performance balance allow flag

[Borislav Petkov]

On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 01:07:38PM +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
> If a sched domain is idle enough for regular power balance, power_lb
> will be set, perf_lb will be clean. If a sched domain is busy,
> their value will be set oppositely.
> 
> If the domain is suitable for power balance, but balance should not
> be down by this cpu(this cpu is already idle or full), both of perf_lb
>  and power_lb are cleared to wait a suitable cpu to do power balance.
> That mean no any balance, neither power balance nor performance balance
> will be done on this cpu.
> 
> Above logical will be implemented by incoming patches.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/fair.c | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 2e8131d..0047856 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -4053,6 +4053,8 @@ struct lb_env {
>  	unsigned int		loop;
>  	unsigned int		loop_break;
>  	unsigned int		loop_max;
> +	int			power_lb;  /* if power balance needed */
> +	int			perf_lb;   /* if performance balance needed */

Those look like they're used like simple boolean flags. Why not make
them such, i.e. bitfields? See struct perf_event_attr for an example.

Thanks.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/