Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Mon, 26 Sep 2022 14:53:38 -0700 | From | Ricardo Neri <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 03/23] sched/core: Initialize the class of a new task |
| |
On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 02:57:29PM +0000, Joel Fernandes wrote: > Hi Ricardo, > > On Fri, Sep 09, 2022 at 04:11:45PM -0700, Ricardo Neri wrote: > > New tasks shall start life as unclassified. They will be classified by > > hardware when they run. > > > > Cc: Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com> > > Cc: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com> > > Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> > > Cc: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com> > > Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de> > > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> > > Cc: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> > > Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> > > Cc: Tim C. Chen <tim.c.chen@intel.com> > > Cc: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com> > > Cc: x86@kernel.org > > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > Signed-off-by: Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com> > > --- > > kernel/sched/core.c | 3 +++ > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c > > index ee28253c9ac0..db548c1a25ef 100644 > > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c > > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c > > @@ -4336,6 +4336,9 @@ static void __sched_fork(unsigned long clone_flags, struct task_struct *p) > > p->se.prev_sum_exec_runtime = 0; > > p->se.nr_migrations = 0; > > p->se.vruntime = 0; > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_TASK_CLASSES > > + p->class = TASK_CLASS_UNCLASSIFIED; > > +#endif > > I find the term 'class' very broad and unclear what kind of class (without > further reading). So I am worried about how this generic term usage plays > with Linux source code in the long-term (like what if someone else comes up > with a usage of term 'class' that is unrelated to IPC.)
Thank you very much for your review Joel! Yes, class seems too generic. It is meant to read, for instance, task_struct::class or p->class, or rq->current-> class. This should imply that we are referring to the class of a task. But yes, I agree that it is too generic.
> > To that end, I was wondering if it could be renamed to p->ipc_class, and > CONFIG_SCHED_TASK_IPC_CLASSES, or something.
This is a good suggestion. I will take it, unless others disagree.
BR, Ricardo
| |