On Tue, 2013-04-09 at 11:06 +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
+void idle_enter(struct rq *this_rq) +{
update_rq_runnable_avg(this_rq, 1);+}
+void idle_exit(struct rq *this_rq) +{
update_rq_runnable_avg(this_rq, 0);+}
These seem like fairly unfortunate names to expose to the global namespace, why not expose update_rq_runnable_avg() instead?
Just to gather in one place all cfs actions that should be done when exiting idle even if we only have update_rq_runnable_avg right now. I have distinguished that from idle_balance because this sequence can't generate extra context switch like idle_balance and they would finally not be called in the same time
OK, but could we then please give then more scheduler specific names? It just seems to me that idle_enter/idle_exit() are very obvious function names for unrelated things.
How about calling it idle_{enter,exit}_fair; so that once other classes grow hooks we can do something like:
static void pre_schedule_idle(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p) { struct sched_class *class;
for_each_class(class) { if (class->idle_enter) class->idle_enter(rq); } }
or whatnot..