From: Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@linaro.org>
To: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@linaro.org>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/7] cpufreq / sched: Make schedutil access utilization data directly
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 07:28:43 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160802142843.GF9332@graphite.smuckle.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160802103817.GZ22472@e106622-lin>
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 11:38:17AM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote:
> > > Anyway one way that my patch differed was that I had used the flags
> > > field to keep the behavior the same for both RT and DL.
>
> Do you mean "go to max" policy for both, until proper policies will be
> implemented in the future?
Yep.
> > That happens
> > > later on in this series for RT but the DL policy is modified as above.
> > > Can the DL policy be left as-is and discussed/modified in a separate
> > > series?
>
> Not that we want to start discussing this point now, if we postpone the
> change for later, but I just wanted to point out a difference w.r.t.
> what the schedfreq thing was doing: it used to sum contributions from
> the different classes, instead of taking the max. We probably never
> really discussed on the list what is the right thing to do, though.
Yeah I figured that was worth deferring into its own patchset/thread.
cheers,
Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-02 14:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-31 23:31 [RFC][PATCH 0/7] cpufreq / sched: cpufreq_update_util() flags and iowait boosting Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-07-31 23:34 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/7] cpufreq / sched: Make schedutil access utilization data directly Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-08-01 19:28 ` Steve Muckle
2016-08-01 23:46 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-08-02 10:38 ` Juri Lelli
2016-08-02 14:28 ` Steve Muckle [this message]
2016-08-02 14:43 ` Juri Lelli
2016-08-08 10:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-07-31 23:35 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/7] cpufreq / sched: Drop cpufreq_trigger_update() Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-07-31 23:36 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/7] cpufreq / sched: Check cpu_of(rq) in cpufreq_update_util() Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-08-01 7:29 ` Dominik Brodowski
2016-08-01 14:57 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-08-01 19:48 ` Steve Muckle
2016-08-01 23:43 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-07-31 23:36 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/7] cpufreq / sched: Add flags argument to cpufreq_update_util() Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-08-01 7:33 ` Dominik Brodowski
2016-08-01 14:57 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-08-01 19:59 ` Steve Muckle
2016-08-01 23:44 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-08-02 1:36 ` Steve Muckle
2016-07-31 23:37 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/7] cpufreq / sched: UUF_IO flag to indicate iowait condition Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-08-02 1:22 ` Steve Muckle
2016-08-02 1:37 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-08-02 22:02 ` Steve Muckle
2016-08-02 22:38 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-08-04 2:24 ` Steve Muckle
2016-08-04 21:19 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-08-04 22:09 ` Steve Muckle
2016-08-05 23:36 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-07-31 23:37 ` [RFC][PATCH 6/7] cpufreq: schedutil: Add iowait boosting Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-08-02 1:35 ` Steve Muckle
2016-08-02 23:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-07-31 23:38 ` [RFC][PATCH 7/7] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Change P-state selection algorithm for Core Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-08-04 4:18 ` Doug Smythies
2016-08-04 6:53 ` Doug Smythies
2016-08-06 0:02 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-08-09 17:16 ` Doug Smythies
2016-08-13 15:59 ` Doug Smythies
2016-08-19 14:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-20 1:06 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-08-20 6:40 ` Doug Smythies
2016-08-22 18:53 ` Srinivas Pandruvada
2016-08-22 22:53 ` Doug Smythies
2016-08-23 3:48 ` Wanpeng Li
2016-08-23 4:08 ` Srinivas Pandruvada
2016-08-23 4:50 ` Wanpeng Li
2016-08-23 17:30 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-08-01 15:26 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/7] cpufreq / sched: cpufreq_update_util() flags and iowait boosting Doug Smythies
2016-08-01 16:30 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-08-08 11:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-08 13:01 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
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=20160802142843.GF9332@graphite.smuckle.net \
--to=steve.muckle@linaro.org \
--cc=juri.lelli@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com \
--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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.