Messages in this thread | | | From | bsegall@google ... | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] sched/fair: don't push cfs_bandwith slack timers forward | Date | Tue, 11 Jun 2019 10:26:08 -0700 |
| |
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> writes:
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2019 at 10:21:01AM -0700, bsegall@google.com wrote: >> diff --git a/kernel/sched/sched.h b/kernel/sched/sched.h >> index efa686eeff26..60219acda94b 100644 >> --- a/kernel/sched/sched.h >> +++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h >> @@ -356,6 +356,7 @@ struct cfs_bandwidth { >> u64 throttled_time; >> >> bool distribute_running; >> + bool slack_started; >> #endif >> }; > > I'm thinking we can this instead? afaict both idle and period_active are > already effecitively booleans and don't need the full 16 bits. > > --- a/kernel/sched/sched.h > +++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h > @@ -338,8 +338,10 @@ struct cfs_bandwidth { > u64 runtime_expires; > int expires_seq; > > - short idle; > - short period_active; > + u8 idle; > + u8 period_active; > + u8 distribute_running; > + u8 slack_started; > struct hrtimer period_timer; > struct hrtimer slack_timer; > struct list_head throttled_cfs_rq; > @@ -348,9 +350,6 @@ struct cfs_bandwidth { > int nr_periods; > int nr_throttled; > u64 throttled_time; > - > - bool distribute_running; > - bool slack_started; > #endif > }; >
Yeah, that makes sense to me, should I spin up another version of the patch doing this too or do you have it from here?
| |