On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 7:11 PM, Dario Faggioli <dario.faggi...@citrix.com> wrote: > > In fact, what we have right now, i.e., tickle_idlers_none > and tickle_idlers_some, is not good enough for describing > what really happens in the various tickling functions of > the various scheduler. > > Switch to a more descriptive set of counters, such as: > - tickled_no_cpu: for when we don't tickle anyone > - tickled_idle_cpu: for when we tickle one or more > idler > - tickled_busy_cpu: for when we tickle one or more > non-idler > > While there, fix style of an "out:" label in sched_rt.c. > > Signed-off-by: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggi...@citrix.com> > --- > Cc: George Dunlap <george.dun...@citrix.com> > Cc: Meng Xu <men...@cis.upenn.edu> > Cc: Anshul Makkar <anshul.mak...@citrix.com> > Cc: David Vrabel <david.vra...@citrix.com> > --- > xen/common/sched_credit.c | 10 +++++++--- > xen/common/sched_credit2.c | 12 +++++------- > xen/common/sched_rt.c | 8 +++++--- > xen/include/xen/perfc_defn.h | 5 +++-- > 4 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
In terms of sched_rt.c and perfc_defn.h, Reviewed-by: Meng Xu <men...@cis.upenn.edu> Thanks, Meng ------------ Meng Xu PhD Student in Computer and Information Science University of Pennsylvania http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~mengxu/ _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
