From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the pm tree
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2017 14:43:16 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170904144316.245a7347@canb.auug.org.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170811140646.6d499a6e@canb.auug.org.au>
Hi all,
On Fri, 11 Aug 2017 14:06:46 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in:
>
> kernel/sched/fair.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 674e75411fc2 ("sched: cpufreq: Allow remote cpufreq callbacks")
>
> from the pm tree and commit:
>
> a030d7381d8b ("sched/fair: Call cpufreq update util handlers less frequently on UP")
>
> from the tip tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
>
> diff --cc kernel/sched/fair.c
> index d378d02fdfcb,8d5868771cb3..000000000000
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@@ -2790,6 -2801,29 +2801,31 @@@ static inline void update_cfs_shares(st
> }
> #endif /* CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED */
>
> + static inline void cfs_rq_util_change(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
> + {
> - if (&this_rq()->cfs == cfs_rq) {
> ++ struct rq *rq = rq_of(cfs_rq);
> ++
> ++ if (&rq->cfs == cfs_rq) {
> + /*
> + * There are a few boundary cases this might miss but it should
> + * get called often enough that that should (hopefully) not be
> + * a real problem -- added to that it only calls on the local
> + * CPU, so if we enqueue remotely we'll miss an update, but
> + * the next tick/schedule should update.
> + *
> + * It will not get called when we go idle, because the idle
> + * thread is a different class (!fair), nor will the utilization
> + * number include things like RT tasks.
> + *
> + * As is, the util number is not freq-invariant (we'd have to
> + * implement arch_scale_freq_capacity() for that).
> + *
> + * See cpu_util().
> + */
> - cpufreq_update_util(rq_of(cfs_rq), 0);
> ++ cpufreq_update_util(rq, 0);
> + }
> + }
> +
> #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> /*
> * Approximate:
Just a reminder that the above conflict still exists.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-04 4:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-11 4:06 linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the pm tree Stephen Rothwell
2017-09-04 4:43 ` Stephen Rothwell [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-02-17 5:07 Stephen Rothwell
2021-02-17 10:15 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-02-22 0:34 ` Stephen Rothwell
2018-10-08 2:44 Stephen Rothwell
2018-10-08 10:06 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-08 10:34 ` Andy Shevchenko
2018-10-08 2:40 Stephen Rothwell
2018-10-08 10:05 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-08 10:41 ` Andy Shevchenko
2018-03-23 2:20 Stephen Rothwell
2018-03-23 6:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2018-03-23 21:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-03-24 8:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-11-06 2:10 Stephen Rothwell
2017-11-06 13:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-11-22 5:48 Stephen Rothwell
2016-06-09 4:34 Stephen Rothwell
2016-04-19 2:59 Stephen Rothwell
2016-03-15 1:55 Stephen Rothwell
2016-03-11 1:57 Stephen Rothwell
2016-03-11 13:51 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-02-29 4:42 Stephen Rothwell
2015-10-06 3:07 Stephen Rothwell
2015-03-31 7:58 Stephen Rothwell
2015-03-31 22:23 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-03-31 7:10 Stephen Rothwell
2014-12-15 2:30 Stephen Rothwell
2014-11-25 5:46 Stephen Rothwell
2014-11-25 21:16 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-08-04 6:55 Stephen Rothwell
2014-05-09 4:49 Stephen Rothwell
2014-01-13 3:29 Stephen Rothwell
2014-01-07 4:20 Stephen Rothwell
2014-01-06 7:18 Stephen Rothwell
2013-08-19 4:09 Stephen Rothwell
2013-04-11 4:08 Stephen Rothwell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170904144316.245a7347@canb.auug.org.au \
--to=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).