From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FSL_HELO_FAKE,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17DB4C43215 for ; Thu, 21 Nov 2019 12:00:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E381020855 for ; Thu, 21 Nov 2019 12:00:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="useGTkdN" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726792AbfKUMAV (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Nov 2019 07:00:21 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-f65.google.com ([209.85.128.65]:56211 "EHLO mail-wm1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726342AbfKUMAU (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Nov 2019 07:00:20 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-f65.google.com with SMTP id b11so3394745wmb.5 for ; Thu, 21 Nov 2019 04:00:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=WrOuxnJH8z2LEEHoE05aukaO/S+sx3wY2zDdww+CY48=; b=useGTkdN0kfUCxBWV9RVjDP3oiQcR9V49e5HKxDCuTBBzMhtkSB2nI8wDmoBr/mW5C TmjYUmPWezdDw1B7n9ApPP3cbiai0aK1FGpiJQ9nrn7kl4UvBKRRk2+m7AK6y31zYgnl CRPNmwxP72YZVNHYWVGbx0FIdi2nQVraF1Xlhb6mlI4s3S/sDN9uH6nVW/GXf1OG1j1F VGf/ecBKNX0K+1Z+bhPP4m5vrgU27NHp9nlLc/+Vmlfp2OQg6/Cwr+jOTJsGr64cHWkx CrGus92zgDlOnt9XyXmo1rsgznb7U7KdED2CxhPMvmJLgjqBZKpFTmU5PYu5YnfKm/Fu S4zg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=WrOuxnJH8z2LEEHoE05aukaO/S+sx3wY2zDdww+CY48=; b=VSSggUUr7vVpAB1UGU0rpLxd96nGxyM0NxDZEz+8LwizrTG+pr6/icq2hg1LapvL0T 0vkBeJ7DisWyhxtFj81/df+xIEqpIwr8z0K2jO4q0gZuivkBjRcnhDa5PIERyAEDDv3g t0aqDAYBl86GiB0AwchBIW5nvmJmRjkXNiOBd5SvNbHvJQIlgyi3fTmViYyvRG03BZOb CZfnySLGR1t6zgpFhgzVdCnt97gvuhfyUmwwQ7S290z1TYGW3lBE7irrooMoLDKZOJ/v FXCFyW3wv/es8a1P2yeuOEna6oZ2gLrOvTYx4Q2Go4u3FYLRsP8qKrRqHPkJ3fIB2Brc HE0A== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWMQJeJcwxkfnwwFlEejHmZNfTMib4fcNpgKaYqJKbf7IGF0lLM 91azCCLv2pgO+OLiGAvRVWef9I1rhOw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyM6C2IJRK4LboK981iYVXOFrMvxJ76CqD2oSxC4D3XEox98MQP5yp44ZaKWEXezC3rVNyY8A== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:9ccd:: with SMTP id f196mr9577217wme.152.1574337617994; Thu, 21 Nov 2019 04:00:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from google.com ([2a00:79e0:d:110:d6cc:2030:37c1:9964]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j7sm3289396wro.54.2019.11.21.04.00.17 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 21 Nov 2019 04:00:17 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 12:00:14 +0000 From: Quentin Perret To: Valentin Schneider Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, mingo@kernel.org, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, patrick.bellasi@matbug.net, qais.yousef@arm.com, morten.rasmussen@arm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] sched/fair: Task placement biasing using uclamp Message-ID: <20191121120014.GA214532@google.com> References: <20191120175533.4672-1-valentin.schneider@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191120175533.4672-1-valentin.schneider@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wednesday 20 Nov 2019 at 17:55:30 (+0000), Valentin Schneider wrote: > While uclamp restrictions currently only impacts schedutil's frequency > selection, it would make sense to also let it impact CPU selection in > asymmetric topologies. This would let us steer specific tasks towards > certain CPU capacities regardless of their actual utilization - I give a > few examples in patch 3. > > The first two patches are just paving the way for the meat of the thing > which is in patch 3. This makes sense, and is in line with what Qais proposed for RT I think. So, with the nit applied to patch 3: Reviewed-by: Quentin Perret Thanks! Quentin