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 S1752670AbdCMKqZ (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Mon, 13 Mar 2017 06:46:25 -0400
Received: from mail-wm0-f67.google.com ([74.125.82.67]:36197 "EHLO
        mail-wm0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751846AbdCMKqP (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 13 Mar 2017 06:46:15 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1488292722-19410-2-git-send-email-patrick.bellasi@arm.com>
References: <1488292722-19410-1-git-send-email-patrick.bellasi@arm.com> <1488292722-19410-2-git-send-email-patrick.bellasi@arm.com>
From: "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel.opensrc@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 03:46:13 -0700
Message-ID: <CAEi0qNkAK_3a_2x9BgvyEC+bFvckGFoQX1fjFba6boC1ws_R5w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v3 1/5] sched/core: add capacity constraints to CPU controller
To: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
        Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 6:38 AM, Patrick Bellasi
<patrick.bellasi@arm.com> wrote:
> The CPU CGroup controller allows to assign a specified (maximum)
> bandwidth to tasks within a group, however it does not enforce any
> constraint on how such bandwidth can be consumed.
> With the integration of schedutil, the scheduler has now the proper
> information about a task to select  the most suitable frequency to
> satisfy tasks needs.
[..]

> +static u64 cpu_capacity_min_read_u64(struct cgroup_subsys_state *css,
> +                                    struct cftype *cft)
> +{
> +       struct task_group *tg;
> +       u64 min_capacity;
> +
> +       rcu_read_lock();
> +       tg = css_tg(css);
> +       min_capacity = tg->cap_clamp[CAP_CLAMP_MIN];

Shouldn't the cap_clamp be accessed with READ_ONCE (and WRITE_ONCE in
the write path) to avoid load-tearing?

Thanks,
Joel