From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753884AbeDKOj2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Apr 2018 10:39:28 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:50100 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753150AbeDKOj0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Apr 2018 10:39:26 -0400 Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 15:39:21 +0100 From: Patrick Bellasi To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Viresh Kumar , Joel Fernandes , Steve Muckle , Juri Lelli , Dietmar Eggemann Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cpufreq/schedutil: Cleanup, document and fix iowait boost Message-ID: <20180411143921.GP14248@e110439-lin> References: <20180410155931.31973-1-patrick.bellasi@arm.com> <20180410193708.GE4043@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20180411104445.GM14248@e110439-lin> <20180411105828.GL4082@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180411105828.GL4082@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11-Apr 12:58, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 11:44:45AM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote: > > > > - sugov_set_iowait_boost: is now in charge only to set/increase the IO > > > > wait boost, every time a task wakes up from an IO wait. > > > > > > > > - sugov_iowait_boost: is now in charge to reset/reduce the IO wait > > > > boost, every time a sugov update is triggered, as well as > > > > to (eventually) enforce the currently required IO boost value. > > > > > > I'm not sold on those function names; feels like we can do better, > > > although I'm struggling to come up with anything sensible just now. > > > > What about something like: > > > > sugov_iowait_init() > > since here we are mainly initializing the iowait boost > > > > sugov_iowait_boost() > > since here we are mainly applying the proper boost to each cpu > > > > Although they are not really so different... > > How about: > > sugov_iowait_boost() -- does the actual impulse/boost > sugov_iowait_apply() -- applies the boost state > > ? Whould say it can work too, and it also allows to add a: sugov_iowait_reset() -- resets boots state after TICK_NSEC CPU idle time Viresh, Rafael, Joel: any preferences or other suggestions? -- #include Patrick Bellasi