[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180508082242.bre6sjfvefhz6xc3@vireshk-i7>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 13:52:42 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
Pavan Kondeti <pkondeti@...eaurora.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>,
Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>,
Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "cpufreq: schedutil: Don't restrict kthread to
related_cpus unnecessarily"
On 08-05-18, 08:33, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> This reverts commit e2cabe48c20efb174ce0c01190f8b9c5f3ea1d13.
>
> Lifting the restriction that the sugov kthread is bound to the
> policy->related_cpus for a system with a slow switching cpufreq driver,
> which is able to perform DVFS from any cpu (e.g. cpufreq-dt), is not
> only not beneficial it also harms Enery-Aware Scheduling (EAS) on
> systems with asymmetric cpu capacities (e.g. Arm big.LITTLE).
>
> The sugov kthread which does the update for the little cpus could
> potentially run on a big cpu. It could prevent that the big cluster goes
> into deeper idle states although all the tasks are running on the little
> cluster.
I think the original patch did the right thing, but that doesn't suit
everybody as you explained.
I wouldn't really revert the patch but fix my platform's cpufreq
driver to set dvfs_possible_from_any_cpu = false, so that other
platforms can still benefit from the original commit.
--
viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists