Re: [PATCH] sched: fair: Improve PELT decay_load calculation comments
From: Joel Fernandes
Date: Wed Mar 22 2017 - 12:35:56 EST
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 7:16 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 12:23:41PM -0800, Joel Fernandes wrote:
>> The PELT decay_load comments are a bit confusing, first of all
>> the 1/2^N should be (1/2)^N so that the reader doesn't get confused.
>
> I'm thinking you're confused. They're identical.
>
> (1/2)^N = (2^-1)^N = 2^-N = 1/2^N
They are identical I know, but I meant by enclosing the 1/2 in
brackets, it is more clear that we multiply by 1/2 N times to the
first time reader - for the reason that we'd like to reduce the PELT
calculated load by 1/2 N times.
>> Secondly, the y^N splitting into a 2-part decay factor deserves
>> a better explanation. This patch improves the comments.
>
> I find its actually harder to read.
Oh, which part? Can you help improve it? Maybe I didn't word something
correctly?
Regards,
Joel