lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 00:41:36 +0200 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net> To: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com> Cc: peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com, 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> Subject: Re: [RFD PATCH 4/5] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: always consider all CPUs when deciding next freq On Friday, March 24, 2017 02:08:59 PM Juri Lelli wrote: > No assumption can be made upon the rate at which frequency updates get > triggered, as there are scheduling policies (like SCHED_DEADLINE) which > don't trigger them so frequently. > > Remove such assumption from the code. But the util/max values for idle CPUs may be stale, no? Thanks, Rafael
Powered by blists - more mailing lists