[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170327165011.dpip23cyolnleas6@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 18:50:11 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, rjw@...ysocki.net, viresh.kumar@...aro.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, luca.abeni@...tannapisa.it,
claudio@...dence.eu.com, tommaso.cucinotta@...tannapisa.it,
bristot@...hat.com, mathieu.poirier@...aro.org, tkjos@...roid.com,
joelaf@...gle.com, andresoportus@...gle.com,
morten.rasmussen@....com, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
patrick.bellasi@....com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFD PATCH 3/5] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: make worker kthread be
SCHED_DEADLINE
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 02:08:58PM +0000, Juri Lelli wrote:
> Worker kthread needs to be able to change frequency for all other
> threads.
>
> Make it special, just under STOP class.
*yuck* ;-)
So imagine our I2C/SPI bus is 'busy' and its mutex taken, then this
'soecial' task will need to boost it. Now add BWI to your thinking and
shudder.
On IRC broonie mentioned that:
- most PMIC operations are fire and forget (no need to wait for a
response).
- PMIC 'packets' are 'small'.
- SPI has the possibility to push stuff on the queue.
Taken together this seems to suggest we can rework cpufreq drivers to
function in-context, either directly push the packet on the bus if
available, or queue it and let whoever owns it sort it without blocking.
It might be possible to rework/augment I2C to also support pushing stuff
on a queue.
So if we can make all that work, we can do away with this horrible
horrible kthread. Which is, IMO, a much better solution.
Thoughts?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists