[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 09:34:54 +0000
From: Juri Lelli <Juri.Lelli@....com>
To: Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@...aro.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>,
Ricky Liang <jcliang@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [RFCv7 PATCH 03/10] sched: scheduler-driven cpu frequency
selection
On 02/03/16 19:50, Steve Muckle wrote:
> On 03/02/2016 06:49 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > I'm not actually sure if RT is the right answer here. DL may be a
> > better choice. After all, we want the thing to happen shortly, but
> > not necessarily at full speed.
> >
> > So something like a DL workqueue would be quite useful here it seems.
>
> The DL idea seems like a good one to me.
>
> It would also prevent cpufreq changes from being delayed by other RT or
> DL tasks.
>
Dimensioning period and runtime could require some experimenting, but
it's worth a try, I agree.
Best,
- Juri
Powered by blists - more mailing lists