From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932123AbeEOQx1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 May 2018 12:53:27 -0400 Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:56580 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752453AbeEOQxZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 May 2018 12:53:25 -0400 Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 18:53:04 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Patrick Bellasi Cc: Vincent Guittot , Joel Fernandes , linux-kernel , "open list:THERMAL" , Ingo Molnar , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Viresh Kumar , Dietmar Eggemann , Morten Rasmussen , Juri Lelli , Joel Fernandes , Steve Muckle Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] sched/fair: schedutil: explicit update only when required Message-ID: <20180515165304.GH12217@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20180510150553.28122-1-patrick.bellasi@arm.com> <20180510150553.28122-4-patrick.bellasi@arm.com> <20180513060443.GB64158@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com> <20180513062538.GA116730@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com> <20180514163206.GF30654@e110439-lin> <20180515145343.GJ30654@e110439-lin> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180515145343.GJ30654@e110439-lin> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.5 (2018-04-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 03:53:43PM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote: > On 15-May 12:19, Vincent Guittot wrote: > > On 14 May 2018 at 18:32, Patrick Bellasi wrote: > > Yes se becomes NULL only when you reach root domain root group; domains are something else again ;-) > Thus, the scheduler knows that we are going to sleep: does is really > makes sense to send a notification in this case? It might; esp. on these very slow changing machines. > What about adding a new explicit callback at the end of: > update_blocked_averages() ? > > Something like: > > ---8<--- > diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c > index cb77407ba485..6eb0f31c656d 100644 > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c > @@ -7740,6 +7740,9 @@ static void update_blocked_averages(int cpu) > if (done) > rq->has_blocked_load = 0; > #endif > + > + cpufreq_update_util(rq, SCHED_CPUFREQ_IDLE); > + > rq_unlock_irqrestore(rq, &rf); > } > ---8<--- > > Where we can also pass in a new SCHED_CPUFREQ_IDLE flag just to notify > schedutil that the CPU is currently IDLE? > > Could that work? Simlarly you could add ENQUEUE/DEQUEUE flags I suppose. But let's do all that later in separate patches and evaluate the impact separately, OK?