ignore_nice vs. ignore_nice_load

I just noticed that recently (apparently since 4d5dcc4211f9def4) the sysfs file that used to be called ignore_nice_load is now called ignore_nice. I don't know why this was renamed, but what has me worried even more is the fact that the documentation in Documentation/cpu-freq/governors.txt wasn't updated accordingly: it still talks about ignore_nice_load. It would be beter to synchronize these two again.

Investigating this issue, I also found that the file used to be called ignore_nice in the past, but at that point apparently had an inverted meaning. The node was renamed deliberately in 001893cda2f280ab when the semantics changed. I can't help but wonder whether anyone might now get confused with this old name popping up again, after all this time. Either name is fine by me, but I am surprised nevertheless.

Quoted 7 lines · Martin von Gagern

I just noticed that recently (apparently since 4d5dcc4211f9def4) the sysfs file that used to be called ignore_nice_load is now called ignore_nice. I don't know why this was renamed, but what has me worried even more is the fact that the documentation in Documentation/cpu-freq/governors.txt wasn't updated accordingly: it still talks about ignore_nice_load. It would be beter to synchronize these two again.

It was an unintentional change... And so we have a bug in our code now.

Quoted 6 lines

Investigating this issue, I also found that the file used to be called ignore_nice in the past, but at that point apparently had an inverted meaning. The node was renamed deliberately in 001893cda2f280ab when the semantics changed. I can't help but wonder whether anyone might now get confused with this old name popping up again, after all this time. Either name is fine by me, but I am surprised nevertheless.

Please try following patch (attached for applying). @Rafael: This bug got introduced recently 3.10, so we may consider it as a fix for 3.11?

------------x----------------x---------------------

From: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 12:28:02 +0530
Subject: [PATCH] cpufreq: rename ignore_nice as ignore_nice_load

This sysfs file was earlier called ignore_nice_load and by mistake was changed to ignore_nice during this patch:

commit 4d5dcc4211f9def4281eafb54b8ed483862e8135

Author: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
Date:   Wed Mar 27 15:58:58 2013 +0000

cpufreq: governor: Implement per policy instances of governors

Lets get it renamed back to its original name.

Reported-by Martin von Gagern <[email protected]>

Signed-off-by Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>

---
 drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 20 ++++++++++----------
 drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c     |  8 ++++----
 drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h     |  4 ++--
 drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c     | 20 ++++++++++----------
 4 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)

drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c +2 -2

index c400924..7f67a75 100644
@@ -209,8 +209,8 @@ static ssize_t store_down_threshold(struct
 dbs_data *dbs_data, const char *buf,
 	return count;
 }
 
-static ssize_t store_ignore_nice(struct dbs_data *dbs_data, const char *buf,
-		size_t count)
+static ssize_t store_ignore_nice_load(struct dbs_data *dbs_data,
+		const char *buf, size_t count)
 {
 	struct cs_dbs_tuners *cs_tuners = dbs_data->tuners;

drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c +2 -2

 	unsigned int input, j;

@@ -223,10 +223,10 @@ static ssize_t store_ignore_nice(struct dbs_data
 *dbs_data, const char *buf,
 	if (input > 1)
 		input = 1;
 
-	if (input == cs_tuners->ignore_nice) /* nothing to do */
+	if (input == cs_tuners->ignore_nice_load) /* nothing to do */
 		return count;
 
-	cs_tuners->ignore_nice = input;
+	cs_tuners->ignore_nice_load = input;
 
 	/* we need to re-evaluate prev_cpu_idle */

drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c +1 -1

 	for_each_online_cpu(j) {

@@ -234,7 +234,7 @@ static ssize_t store_ignore_nice(struct dbs_data
 *dbs_data, const char *buf,
 		dbs_info = &per_cpu(cs_cpu_dbs_info, j);
 		dbs_info->cdbs.prev_cpu_idle = get_cpu_idle_time(j,
 					&dbs_info->cdbs.prev_cpu_wall, 0);
-		if (cs_tuners->ignore_nice)
+		if (cs_tuners->ignore_nice_load)
 			dbs_info->cdbs.prev_cpu_nice =
 				kcpustat_cpu(j).cpustat[CPUTIME_NICE];

drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c +5 -5

 	}

@@ -267,7 +267,7 @@ show_store_one(cs, sampling_rate);
 show_store_one(cs, sampling_down_factor);
 show_store_one(cs, up_threshold);
 show_store_one(cs, down_threshold);
-show_store_one(cs, ignore_nice);
+show_store_one(cs, ignore_nice_load);
 show_store_one(cs, freq_step);
 declare_show_sampling_rate_min(cs);
 

@@ -275,7 +275,7 @@ gov_sys_pol_attr_rw(sampling_rate);
 gov_sys_pol_attr_rw(sampling_down_factor);
 gov_sys_pol_attr_rw(up_threshold);
 gov_sys_pol_attr_rw(down_threshold);
-gov_sys_pol_attr_rw(ignore_nice);
+gov_sys_pol_attr_rw(ignore_nice_load);
 gov_sys_pol_attr_rw(freq_step);
 gov_sys_pol_attr_ro(sampling_rate_min);
 

@@ -285,7 +285,7 @@ static struct attribute *dbs_attributes_gov_sys[] = {
 	&sampling_down_factor_gov_sys.attr,
 	&up_threshold_gov_sys.attr,
 	&down_threshold_gov_sys.attr,
-	&ignore_nice_gov_sys.attr,
+	&ignore_nice_load_gov_sys.attr,
 	&freq_step_gov_sys.attr,
 	NULL
 };

@@ -301,7 +301,7 @@ static struct attribute *dbs_attributes_gov_pol[] = {
 	&sampling_down_factor_gov_pol.attr,
 	&up_threshold_gov_pol.attr,
 	&down_threshold_gov_pol.attr,
-	&ignore_nice_gov_pol.attr,
+	&ignore_nice_load_gov_pol.attr,
 	&freq_step_gov_pol.attr,
 	NULL
 };

@@ -326,7 +326,7 @@ static int cs_init(struct dbs_data *dbs_data)
 	tuners->up_threshold = DEF_FREQUENCY_UP_THRESHOLD;
 	tuners->down_threshold = DEF_FREQUENCY_DOWN_THRESHOLD;
 	tuners->sampling_down_factor = DEF_SAMPLING_DOWN_FACTOR;
-	tuners->ignore_nice = 0;
+	tuners->ignore_nice_load = 0;
 	tuners->freq_step = DEF_FREQUENCY_STEP;
 
 	dbs_data->tuners = tuners;

drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c +4 -4

index 556064e..8742736 100644
@@ -41,9 +41,9 @@ void dbs_check_cpu(struct dbs_data *dbs_data, int cpu)
 	unsigned int j;
 
 	if (dbs_data->cdata->governor == GOV_ONDEMAND)
-		ignore_nice = od_tuners->ignore_nice;
+		ignore_nice = od_tuners->ignore_nice_load;
 	else
-		ignore_nice = cs_tuners->ignore_nice;
+		ignore_nice = cs_tuners->ignore_nice_load;
 
 	policy = cdbs->cur_policy;
 

@@ -284,12 +284,12 @@ int cpufreq_governor_dbs(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
 		cs_tuners = dbs_data->tuners;
 		cs_dbs_info = dbs_data->cdata->get_cpu_dbs_info_s(cpu);
 		sampling_rate = cs_tuners->sampling_rate;
-		ignore_nice = cs_tuners->ignore_nice;
+		ignore_nice = cs_tuners->ignore_nice_load;
 	} else {
 		od_tuners = dbs_data->tuners;
 		od_dbs_info = dbs_data->cdata->get_cpu_dbs_info_s(cpu);
 		sampling_rate = od_tuners->sampling_rate;
-		ignore_nice = od_tuners->ignore_nice;
+		ignore_nice = od_tuners->ignore_nice_load;
 		od_ops = dbs_data->cdata->gov_ops;
 		io_busy = od_tuners->io_is_busy;
 	}

drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h +2 -2

index 264e509..a02d78b 100644
@@ -164,7 +164,7 @@ struct cs_cpu_dbs_info_s {
 
 /* Per policy Governers sysfs tunables */
 struct od_dbs_tuners {
-	unsigned int ignore_nice;
+	unsigned int ignore_nice_load;
 	unsigned int sampling_rate;
 	unsigned int sampling_down_factor;
 	unsigned int up_threshold;

@@ -173,7 +173,7 @@ struct od_dbs_tuners {
 };
 
 struct cs_dbs_tuners {
-	unsigned int ignore_nice;
+	unsigned int ignore_nice_load;
 	unsigned int sampling_rate;
 	unsigned int sampling_down_factor;
 	unsigned int up_threshold;

drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c +2 -2

index 117278a..87f3305 100644
@@ -372,8 +372,8 @@ static ssize_t store_sampling_down_factor(struct
 dbs_data *dbs_data,
 	return count;
 }
 
-static ssize_t store_ignore_nice(struct dbs_data *dbs_data, const char *buf,
-		size_t count)
+static ssize_t store_ignore_nice_load(struct dbs_data *dbs_data,
+		const char *buf, size_t count)
 {
 	struct od_dbs_tuners *od_tuners = dbs_data->tuners;

drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c +2 -2

 	unsigned int input;

@@ -388,10 +388,10 @@ static ssize_t store_ignore_nice(struct dbs_data
 *dbs_data, const char *buf,
 	if (input > 1)
 		input = 1;
 
-	if (input == od_tuners->ignore_nice) { /* nothing to do */
+	if (input == od_tuners->ignore_nice_load) { /* nothing to do */
 		return count;
 	}
-	od_tuners->ignore_nice = input;
+	od_tuners->ignore_nice_load = input;
 
 	/* we need to re-evaluate prev_cpu_idle */

drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c +6 -6

 	for_each_online_cpu(j) {

@@ -399,7 +399,7 @@ static ssize_t store_ignore_nice(struct dbs_data
 *dbs_data, const char *buf,
 		dbs_info = &per_cpu(od_cpu_dbs_info, j);
 		dbs_info->cdbs.prev_cpu_idle = get_cpu_idle_time(j,
 			&dbs_info->cdbs.prev_cpu_wall, od_tuners->io_is_busy);
-		if (od_tuners->ignore_nice)
+		if (od_tuners->ignore_nice_load)
 			dbs_info->cdbs.prev_cpu_nice =
 				kcpustat_cpu(j).cpustat[CPUTIME_NICE];

@@ -430,7 +430,7 @@ show_store_one(od, sampling_rate);
 show_store_one(od, io_is_busy);
 show_store_one(od, up_threshold);
 show_store_one(od, sampling_down_factor);
-show_store_one(od, ignore_nice);
+show_store_one(od, ignore_nice_load);
 show_store_one(od, powersave_bias);
 declare_show_sampling_rate_min(od);
 

@@ -438,7 +438,7 @@ gov_sys_pol_attr_rw(sampling_rate);
 gov_sys_pol_attr_rw(io_is_busy);
 gov_sys_pol_attr_rw(up_threshold);
 gov_sys_pol_attr_rw(sampling_down_factor);
-gov_sys_pol_attr_rw(ignore_nice);
+gov_sys_pol_attr_rw(ignore_nice_load);
 gov_sys_pol_attr_rw(powersave_bias);
 gov_sys_pol_attr_ro(sampling_rate_min);
 

@@ -447,7 +447,7 @@ static struct attribute *dbs_attributes_gov_sys[] = {
 	&sampling_rate_gov_sys.attr,
 	&up_threshold_gov_sys.attr,
 	&sampling_down_factor_gov_sys.attr,
-	&ignore_nice_gov_sys.attr,
+	&ignore_nice_load_gov_sys.attr,
 	&powersave_bias_gov_sys.attr,
 	&io_is_busy_gov_sys.attr,
 	NULL

@@ -463,7 +463,7 @@ static struct attribute *dbs_attributes_gov_pol[] = {
 	&sampling_rate_gov_pol.attr,
 	&up_threshold_gov_pol.attr,
 	&sampling_down_factor_gov_pol.attr,
-	&ignore_nice_gov_pol.attr,
+	&ignore_nice_load_gov_pol.attr,
 	&powersave_bias_gov_pol.attr,
 	&io_is_busy_gov_pol.attr,
 	NULL

@@ -509,7 +509,7 @@ static int od_init(struct dbs_data *dbs_data)
 	}
 
 	tuners->sampling_down_factor = DEF_SAMPLING_DOWN_FACTOR;
-	tuners->ignore_nice = 0;
+	tuners->ignore_nice_load = 0;
 	tuners->powersave_bias = default_powersave_bias;
 	tuners->io_is_busy = should_io_be_busy();

Please try following patch (attached for applying). [0001-cpufreq-rename-ignore_nice-as-ignore_nice_load.patch]