lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [May]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/3] sched/fair: schedutil: explicit update only when required
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 <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> 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?

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-05-15 18:53    [W:0.100 / U:0.276 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site