lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Sep]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/3] condition EAS enablement on FI support
On Thursday 24 Sep 2020 at 14:37:27 (+0100), Quentin Perret wrote:
> On Thursday 24 Sep 2020 at 13:39:34 (+0100), Ionela Voinescu wrote:
> > Given the maturity gained by cpufreq-based Frequency Invariance (FI)
> > support following the patches at [1], this series conditions Energy
> > Aware Scheduling (EAS) enablement on a frequency invariant system.
> >
> > Currently, EAS can be enabled on a system without FI support, leading
> > to incorrect (energy-wise) task placements. As no warning is emitted,
> > it could take some debugging effort to track the behavior back to the
> > lack of FI support; this series changes that by disabling EAS
> > (and advertising it) when FI support is missing.
> >
> > The series is structured as follows:
> > - 1/3 - create function that can rebuild the scheduling and EAS'
> > performance domains if EAS' initial conditions change
> > - 2/3 - condition EAS enablement on FI support
> > - 3/3 - arm64: rebuild scheduling and performance domains in the
> > case of late, counter-driven FI initialisation.
>
> I'm still reading through this, but shouldn't patch 2 and 3 be swapped?
> Otherwise we have a weird state at patch 2 where EAS will fail to start
> (IIUC), which might not be ideal for bisection.
>
> Thoughts?

I probably invented myself reasons for not doing it, like: without 2/3,
3/3 does not make any sense having and the scenario at 3/3 is currently
unlikely.

But it would definitely make it safer, so I'll change the order.

Thanks,
Ionela.

>
> Cheers,
> Quentin

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-09-24 18:09    [W:0.083 / U:1.600 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site