[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160711112404.GJ30154@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 13:24:04 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, dietmar.eggemann@....com, yuyang.du@...el.com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, mgalbraith@...e.de,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/13] sched: Enable SD_BALANCE_WAKE for asymmetric
capacity systems
On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 12:04:58PM +0100, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
> One alternative to setting ASYM_CAP bottom up would be to set it only
> where the asymmetry can be observed, and instead come up with a more
> complicated way of setting BALANCE_WAKE bottom up until and including
> the first level having the ASYM_CAP.
Right, that is what I was thinking.
> I looked at it briefly an realized that I couldn't find a clean way of
> implementing it as I don't think we have visibility of which flags that
> will be set at higher levels in the sched_domain hierarchy when the
> lower levels are initialized. IOW, we have behavioural flags settings
> depend on topology flags settings at a different level.
Looks doable if we pass @child into sd_init() in build_sched_domain().
Then we could simply do:
*sd = (struct sched_domain){
/* ... */
.child = child,
};
if (sd->flags & ASYM_CAP) {
struct sched_domain *t = sd;
while (t) {
t->sd_flags |= BALANCE_WAKE;
t = t->child;
}
}
Or something like that.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists