Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 28 Jan 2002 16:22:56 +0100 (CET) | From | Richard Guenther <> | Subject | Re: [patch] [sched] load-balancer improvements, 2.5.3-pre5 |
| |
> static void smp_tune_scheduling (void) > { > @@ -957,9 +959,13 @@ > cacheflush_time = (cpu_khz>>10) * (cachesize<<10) / bandwidth; > } > > + cache_decay_ticks = (long)cacheflush_time/cpu_khz * HZ / 1000; > + > printk("per-CPU timeslice cutoff: %ld.%02ld usecs.\n", > (long)cacheflush_time/(cpu_khz/1000), > ((long)cacheflush_time*100/(cpu_khz/1000)) % 100); > + printk("task migration cache decay timeout: %ld msecs.\n", > + (cache_decay_ticks + 1) * 1000 / HZ); > }
Isnt it better for such randomly(?) choosen numbers like 1000 and 100 which you use to divide / modulo to choose them as a near power of two? Like 1024 for / 1000 and 128 for the */% 100 above? For correctness just change cpu_khz to be 1024*hz, not 1000*hz.
Richard.
-- Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@uni-tuebingen.de> WWW: http://www.tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de/~rguenth/ The GLAME Project: http://www.glame.de/
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |