[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56FEEAD0.2040108@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2016 14:40:32 -0700
From: Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@...aro.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Juri Lelli <Juri.Lelli@....com>,
Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] sched/fair: call cpufreq hook in additional paths
On 03/31/2016 02:14 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 09:59:51AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> > > - passing an argument into attach_entity_load_avg() to indicate
>>> > > whether calling the cpufreq hook is necessary
>>> > >
>>> > > Both of these are ugly in their own way but would avoid a runtime
>>> > > cost. Opinions welcome.
>> >
>> > Lemme see what this would look like while I throw the below into the bit
>> > bucket.
> OK, so the below looks a lot more sane; and has the surprising benefit
> of actually shrinking the text size..
>
> 43675 1226 24 44925 af7d defconfig-build/kernel/sched/fair.o.base
> 43723 1226 24 44973 afad defconfig-build/kernel/sched/fair.o.patch
> 43595 1226 24 44845 af2d defconfig-build/kernel/sched/fair.o.patch+
>
> ---
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
Cool, thanks. Shall I fold this into this patch and resend the series of
3? Or would you prefer to add this change separately?
thanks,
Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists