[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1329735829.2293.309.camel@twins>
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 12:03:49 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>
Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Saravana Kannan <skannan@...eaurora.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org,
Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, cpufreq@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@...aro.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Mike Chan <mike@...roid.com>, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
Todd Poynor <toddpoynor@...gle.com>, kernel-team@...roid.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Arjan Van De Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/4] Scheduler idle notifiers and users
On Fri, 2012-02-17 at 10:00 +0100, Dominik Brodowski wrote:
>
> Well, we can actually have both: Adding a new cpufreq governor "scheduler"
> is easy. The scheduler stores the target frequency (in per-cent or
> per-mille) in (per-cpu) data available to this governor, and kick a
> (per-cpu?) thread which then handels the rest -- by existing cpufreq means.
> The cpufreq part is easy, the sched part less so (I think).
You might not have been reading what I wrote, kicking a kthread (or
doing any other scheduler activity) from within the scheduler is way
ugly and something I'd really rather avoid if at all possible.
Yes I could do it, but I really really don't want to.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists