[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140918231715.GO2848@worktop.localdomain>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 01:17:15 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] sched: let the scheduler see CPU idle states
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 02:32:25PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2014, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > So what is it that you really need to do here?
>
> In short, we don't want the cpufreq data to go away (see the 2 scenarios
> above) while the scheduler is looking at it. The scheduler uses the
> provided accessors (see patch 2/2) so we can put any protection
> mechanism we want in them. A simple spinlock could do just as well
> which should be good enough.
rq->lock disables interrupts so on that something like
kick_all_cpus_sync() will guarantee what you need --
wake_up_all_idle_cpus() will not.
--
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