Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched/uclamp: Add a new sysctl to control RT default boost value

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 16:19:42 +0100
Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> > root@h960:~# find / -name "*util_clamp*"
> > /proc/sys/kernel/sched_rt_default_util_clamp_min
> > /proc/sys/kernel/sched_util_clamp_max
> > /proc/sys/kernel/sched_util_clamp_min
> > 
> > IMHO, keeping the common 'sched_util_clamp_' would be helpful here, e.g.
> > 
> > /proc/sys/kernel/sched_util_clamp_rt_default_min  
> 
> All RT related knobs are prefixed with 'sched_rt'. I kept the 'util_clamp_min'
> coherent with the current sysctl (sched_util_clamp_min). Quentin suggested
> adding 'default' to be more obvious, so I ended up with
> 
> 	'sched_rt' + '_default' + '_util_clamp_min'.
> 
> I think this is the logical and most consistent form. Given that Patrick seems
> to be okay with the 'default' now, does this look good to you too?

There's only two files with "sched_rt" and they are tightly coupled
(they define how much an RT task may use the CPU).

My question is, is this "sched_rt_default_util_clamp_min" related in
any way to those other two files that start with "sched_rt", or is it
more related to the files that start with "sched_util_clamp"?

If the latter, then I would suggest using
"sched_util_clamp_min_rt_default", as it looks to be more related to
the "sched_util_clamp_min" than to anything else.

-- Steve




[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux