[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140319120122.GK27632@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 13:01:22 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
tony.luck@...el.com, fenghua.yu@...el.com, schwidefsky@...ibm.com,
james.hogan@...tec.com, cmetcalf@...era.com,
benh@...nel.crashing.org, linux@....linux.org.uk,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/7] sched: add a new SD_SHARE_POWERDOMAIN for
sched_domain
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 06:56:47PM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> A new flag SD_SHARE_POWERDOMAIN is created to reflect whether groups of CPUs
> in a sched_domain level can or not reach different power state. As an example,
> the flag should be cleared at CPU level if groups of cores can be power gated
> independently. This information can be used to add load balancing level between
> group of CPUs than can power gate independantly. The default behavior of the
> scheduler is to spread tasks across CPUs and groups of CPUs
> so the flag is set into all sched_domains.
I suppose that is the part Preeti stumbled over; as did I. Its not set
at all.
--
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