From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:49:32 +0100 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Dietmar Eggemann Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , Quentin Perret , Thara Gopinath , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Morten Rasmussen , Chris Redpath , Patrick Bellasi , Valentin Schneider , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Vincent Guittot , Viresh Kumar , Todd Kjos , Joel Fernandes Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 6/6] drivers: base: arch_topology.c: Enable EAS for arm/arm64 platforms Message-ID: <20180320094932.GA23359@kroah.com> References: <20180320094312.24081-1-dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> <20180320094312.24081-7-dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180320094312.24081-7-dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 09:43:12AM +0000, Dietmar Eggemann wrote: > From: Quentin Perret > > Energy Aware Scheduling (EAS) has to be started from the arch code. Ok, but: > This commit enables it from the arch topology driver for arm/arm64 > systems, hence enabling a better support for Arm big.LITTLE and future > DynamIQ architectures. Why does this have to be in the driver core code just for those specific types of cpus? > > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman > Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret > --- > drivers/base/arch_topology.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c > index 52ec5174bcb1..e2206ea16538 100644 > --- a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c > +++ b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c > @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ > #include > #include > #include > +#include > > DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, freq_scale) = SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE; > > @@ -204,6 +205,7 @@ init_cpu_capacity_callback(struct notifier_block *nb, > free_raw_capacity(); > pr_debug("cpu_capacity: parsing done\n"); > schedule_work(&parsing_done_work); > + init_sched_energy(); This is not arch-specific code only for arm. Don't you have a ARM cpu bringup code somewhere? Shouldn't this call be in there? It feels odd that this scheduler change is buried way down here... thanks, greg k-h