Messages in this thread | | | From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/4] sched: cpufreq: Keep track of cpufreq utilization update flags | Date | Sun, 17 Dec 2017 01:19:16 +0100 |
| |
On Saturday, December 16, 2017 5:47:07 PM CET Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 16 December 2017 at 22:10, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 10:53 AM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote: > > >> +#define SCHED_CPUFREQ_CLEAR (1U << 31) > > > > I'm not thrilled by this, because schedutil is not the only user of > > the flags and it's totally unclear what the other user(s) should do > > when this is set. > > intel-pstate is the only other user of the IOWAIT flag, right? In order > not to change the current behavior, we can update that to return early > for now ?
We can do that in principle, but why should it return early? Maybe it's a good time to update things, incidentally?
I actually don't like the SCHED_CPUFRREQ_CLEAR flag *concept* as it is very much specific to schedutil and blatantly ignores everybody else.
Alternatively, you could add two flags for clearing SCHED_CPUFREQ_RT and SCHED_CPUFREQ_DL that could just be ingored entirely by intel_pstate.
So, why don't you make SCHED_CPUFREQ_RT and SCHED_CPUFREQ_DL "sticky" until, say, SCHED_CPUFREQ_NO_RT and SCHED_CPUFREQ_NO_DL are passed, respectively?
Thanks, Rafael
| |