Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 21 Apr 2013 10:54:47 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] sched: move content out of core files for load average |
| |
* Rakib Mullick <rakib.mullick@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > * Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> wrote: > > > >> On 13-04-18 07:14 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > >> > On Mon, 2013-04-15 at 11:33 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > >> >> * Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> Recent activity has had a focus on moving functionally related blocks of stuff > >> >>> out of sched/core.c into stand-alone files. The code relating to load average > >> >>> calculations has grown significantly enough recently to warrant placing it in a > >> >>> separate file. > >> >>> > >> >>> Here we do that, and in doing so, we shed ~20k of code from sched/core.c (~10%). > >> >>> > >> >>> A couple small static functions in the core sched.h header were also localized > >> >>> to their singular user in sched/fair.c at the same time, with the goal to also > >> >>> reduce the amount of "broadcast" content in that sched.h file. > >> >> > >> >> Nice! > >> >> > >> >> Peter, is this (and the naming of the new file) fine with you too? > >> > > >> > Yes and no.. that is I do like the change, but I don't like the > >> > filename. We have _waaaay_ too many different things we call load_avg. > >> > > >> > That said, I'm having a somewhat hard time coming up with a coherent > >> > alternative :/ > >> > >> Several of the relocated functions start their name with "calc_load..." > >> Does "calc_load.c" sound any better? > > > > Peter has a point about load_avg being somewhat of a misnomer: that's not your > > fault in any way, we created overlapping naming within the scheduler and are now > > hurting from it. > > > > Here are the main scheduler 'load' concepts we have right now: > > > > - The externally visible 'average load' value extracted by tools like 'top' via > > /proc/loadavg and handled by fs/proc/loadavg.c. Internally the naming is all > > over the map: the fields that are updated are named 'avenrun[]', most other > > variables and methods are named calc_load_*(), and a few callbacks are named > > *_cpu_load_*(). > > > > - rq->cpu_load, a weighted, vectored scheduler-internal notion of task load > > average with multiple run length averages. Only exposed by debug interfaces but > > otherwise relied on by the scheduler for SMP load balancing. > > > > - se->avg - per entity (per task) load average. This is integrated differently > > from the cpu_load - but work is ongoing to possibly integrate it with the > > rq->cpu_load metric. This metric is used for CPU internal execution time > > allocation and timeslicing, based on nice value priorities and cgroup > > weights and constraints. > > > > Work is ongoing to integrate rq->cpu_load and se->avg - eventually they will > > become one metric. > > > > It might eventually make sense to integrate the 'average load' calculation as well > > with all this - as they really have a similar purpose, the avenload[] vector of > > averages is conceptually similar to the rq->cpu_load[] vector of averages. > > > > So I'd suggest to side-step all that existing confusion and simply name the new > > file kernel/sched/proc.c - our external /proc scheduler ABI towards userspace. > > This is similar to the already existing kernel/irq/proc.c pattern. > > > Well, kernel/sched/stat.c - also exposes scheduler ABI to userspace.
schedstats is more like a debug API, used by a low number of tools.
So I don't think it's particularly confusing.
Thanks,
Ingo
| |