lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jan]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC v5 PATCH 1/8] sched: Rename struct rt_bandwidth to sched_bandwidth
* Bharata B Rao <bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com> [2010-01-05 13:28:24]:

> sched: Rename struct rt_bandwidth to sched_bandwidth
>
> From: Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> Rename struct rt_bandwidth to sched_bandwidth and rename some of the
> routines to generic names (s/rt_/sched_) so that they can be used
> by CFS hard limits code in the subsequent patches.
>
> No functionality change by this patch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Bharata B Rao <bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

Looks good, some nit picks below

Acked-by: Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>


> ---
> kernel/sched.c | 127 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------
> kernel/sched_rt.c | 46 ++++++++++---------
> 2 files changed, 86 insertions(+), 87 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c
> index c535cc4..21cf0d5 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched.c
> @@ -139,50 +139,50 @@ struct rt_prio_array {
> struct list_head queue[MAX_RT_PRIO];
> };
>
> -struct rt_bandwidth {
> +struct sched_bandwidth {
> /* nests inside the rq lock: */
> - raw_spinlock_t rt_runtime_lock;
> - ktime_t rt_period;
> - u64 rt_runtime;
> - struct hrtimer rt_period_timer;
> + raw_spinlock_t runtime_lock;
> + ktime_t period;
> + u64 runtime;
> + struct hrtimer period_timer;
> };
>
> -static struct rt_bandwidth def_rt_bandwidth;
> +static struct sched_bandwidth def_rt_bandwidth;
>
> -static int do_sched_rt_period_timer(struct rt_bandwidth *rt_b, int overrun);
> +static int do_sched_rt_period_timer(struct sched_bandwidth *sched_b, int overrun);
>
> static enum hrtimer_restart sched_rt_period_timer(struct hrtimer *timer)
> {
> - struct rt_bandwidth *rt_b =
> - container_of(timer, struct rt_bandwidth, rt_period_timer);
> + struct sched_bandwidth *sched_b =
> + container_of(timer, struct sched_bandwidth, period_timer);
> ktime_t now;
> int overrun;
> int idle = 0;
>
> for (;;) {
> now = hrtimer_cb_get_time(timer);
> - overrun = hrtimer_forward(timer, now, rt_b->rt_period);
> + overrun = hrtimer_forward(timer, now, sched_b->period);
>
> if (!overrun)
> break;
>
> - idle = do_sched_rt_period_timer(rt_b, overrun);
> + idle = do_sched_rt_period_timer(sched_b, overrun);
> }
>
> return idle ? HRTIMER_NORESTART : HRTIMER_RESTART;
> }
>
> -static
> -void init_rt_bandwidth(struct rt_bandwidth *rt_b, u64 period, u64 runtime)
> +static void init_sched_bandwidth(struct sched_bandwidth *sched_b, u64 period,
> + u64 runtime, enum hrtimer_restart (*period_timer)(struct hrtimer *))
> {
> - rt_b->rt_period = ns_to_ktime(period);
> - rt_b->rt_runtime = runtime;
> + sched_b->period = ns_to_ktime(period);
> + sched_b->runtime = runtime;
>
> - raw_spin_lock_init(&rt_b->rt_runtime_lock);
> + raw_spin_lock_init(&sched_b->runtime_lock);
>
> - hrtimer_init(&rt_b->rt_period_timer,
> + hrtimer_init(&sched_b->period_timer,
> CLOCK_MONOTONIC, HRTIMER_MODE_REL);
> - rt_b->rt_period_timer.function = sched_rt_period_timer;
> + sched_b->period_timer.function = *period_timer;

Hmm.. may be I forgetting the "C" language, but why do you dereference
the pointer before assignment? You should be able to directly assign a
function address to the function pointer. Did you see a warning?

> }
>
> static inline int rt_bandwidth_enabled(void)
> @@ -190,42 +190,40 @@ static inline int rt_bandwidth_enabled(void)
> return sysctl_sched_rt_runtime >= 0;
> }
>
> -static void start_rt_bandwidth(struct rt_bandwidth *rt_b)
> +static void start_sched_bandwidth(struct sched_bandwidth *sched_b)
> {
> ktime_t now;
>
> - if (!rt_bandwidth_enabled() || rt_b->rt_runtime == RUNTIME_INF)
> + if (!rt_bandwidth_enabled() || sched_b->runtime == RUNTIME_INF)
> return;
>
> - if (hrtimer_active(&rt_b->rt_period_timer))
> + if (hrtimer_active(&sched_b->period_timer))
> return;
>
> - raw_spin_lock(&rt_b->rt_runtime_lock);
> + raw_spin_lock(&sched_b->runtime_lock);

I don't quite understand why this is a raw_spin_lock

[snip]

--
Balbir


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-01-29 10:03    [W:0.085 / U:0.144 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site