On 3 October 2014 17:38, Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 06:08:04PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote: > >> This implementation of utilization_avg_contrib doesn't solve the scaling >> in-variance problem, so i have to scale the utilization with original >> capacity of the CPU in order to get the CPU usage and compare it with the >> capacity. Once the scaling invariance will have been added in >> utilization_avg_contrib, we will remove the scale of utilization_avg_contrib >> by cpu_capacity_orig in get_cpu_usage. But the scaling invariance will come >> in another patchset. > > I would have expected this in the previous patch that introduced that > lot. Including a few words on how/why the cpu_capacity is a 'good' > approximation etc..
That's fair, i can move the explanation > >> Finally, the sched_group->sched_group_capacity->capacity_orig has been >> removed >> because it's more used during load balance. > > That sentence is a contradiction, I expect there's a negative gone > missing someplace. yes the "no" is of "because it is no more used during load balance" is missing -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
