Hi, On 05/12/17 15:17, Patrick Bellasi wrote: > Hi Juri, > > On 04-Dec 11:23, Juri Lelli wrote: > > From: Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> > > > > To be able to treat utilization signals of different scheduling classes > > in different ways (e.g., CFS signal might be stale while DEADLINE signal > > is never stale by design) we need to split sugov_cpu::util signal in two: > > util_cfs and util_dl. > > > > This patch does that by also changing sugov_get_util() parameter list. > > After this change, aggregation of the different signals has to be performed > > by sugov_get_util() users (so that they can decide what to do with the > > different signals). > > Did not tried myself, but to me it would be nice to have this patch > squashed with the first one of this series. After all, looking at this > one it seems that [RFC PATH 1/8] is just adding util_dl but it's not > really using it the proper way. > > Here instead is where you better introduce two separate signals, > tracked by struct sugov_cpu, and properly aggregate them. > > But perhaps that's just me being picky ;-) >
Sure. It looked too invasive as a single patch to me. Also, I was trying to follow the "one change one patch" rule. So, I'd keep them separate. What others think? Best, - Juri
