Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/9] xen: sched: improve scope and placement of credit2 boot parameters

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 29.09.15 at 18:55, <dario.faggioli@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> --- a/xen/common/sched_credit2.c
> +++ b/xen/common/sched_credit2.c
> @@ -162,7 +162,7 @@
>  #define CSFLAG_runq_migrate_request (1<<__CSFLAG_runq_migrate_request)
>  
>  
> -int opt_migrate_resist=500;
> +static int __read_mostly opt_migrate_resist = 500;
>  integer_param("sched_credit2_migrate_resist", opt_migrate_resist);
>  
>  /*
> @@ -185,12 +185,12 @@ integer_param("sched_credit2_migrate_resist", 
> opt_migrate_resist);
>   *   to a load of 1.
>   */
>  #define LOADAVG_GRANULARITY_SHIFT (10)
> -int opt_load_window_shift=18;
> +static int __read_mostly opt_load_window_shift = 18;
>  #define  LOADAVG_WINDOW_SHIFT_MIN 4
>  integer_param("credit2_load_window_shift", opt_load_window_shift);
> -int opt_underload_balance_tolerance=0;
> +static int __read_mostly opt_underload_balance_tolerance = 0;
>  integer_param("credit2_balance_under", opt_underload_balance_tolerance);
> -int opt_overload_balance_tolerance=-3;
> +static int __read_mostly opt_overload_balance_tolerance = -3;
>  integer_param("credit2_balance_over", opt_overload_balance_tolerance);

Are all of these validly _signed_ int? If not, I think adjusting their
types here would be quite appropriate.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel