From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1758586AbcGKLYK (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 11 Jul 2016 07:24:10 -0400
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:58587 "EHLO
	bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752525AbcGKLYJ (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 11 Jul 2016 07:24:09 -0400
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 13:24:04 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, yuyang.du@intel.com,
        vincent.guittot@linaro.org, mgalbraith@suse.de,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/13] sched: Enable SD_BALANCE_WAKE for asymmetric
 capacity systems
Message-ID: <20160711112404.GJ30154@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1466615004-3503-1-git-send-email-morten.rasmussen@arm.com>
 <1466615004-3503-6-git-send-email-morten.rasmussen@arm.com>
 <20160711100449.GM30909@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20160711103717.GF12540@e105550-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
 <20160711110458.GH12540@e105550-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160711110458.GH12540@e105550-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23.1 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 12:04:58PM +0100, Morten Rasmussen wrote:

> One alternative to setting ASYM_CAP bottom up would be to set it only
> where the asymmetry can be observed, and instead come up with a more
> complicated way of setting BALANCE_WAKE bottom up until and including
> the first level having the ASYM_CAP.

Right, that is what I was thinking.

> I looked at it briefly an realized that I couldn't find a clean way of
> implementing it as I don't think we have visibility of which flags that
> will be set at higher levels in the sched_domain hierarchy when the
> lower levels are initialized. IOW, we have behavioural flags settings
> depend on topology flags settings at a different level.

Looks doable if we pass @child into sd_init() in build_sched_domain().
Then we could simply do:

	*sd = (struct sched_domain){
		/* ... */
		.child = child,
	};

	if (sd->flags & ASYM_CAP) {
		struct sched_domain *t = sd;
		while (t) {
			t->sd_flags |= BALANCE_WAKE;
			t = t->child;
		}
	}

Or something like that.