[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180510153420.GG12217@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 17:34:20 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>,
Steve Muckle <smuckle@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] sched/fair: util_est: update before schedutil
On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 04:05:52PM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 1f6a23a5b451..01dfc47541e6 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -5356,6 +5356,9 @@ enqueue_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)
> struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq;
> struct sched_entity *se = &p->se;
>
> + /* Estimated utilization must be updated before schedutil */
> + util_est_enqueue(&rq->cfs, p);
Please clarify the comment with a reason; because I'm sure that the next
time I see that comment, I'll go 'but why again!?'.
> /*
> * If in_iowait is set, the code below may not trigger any cpufreq
> * utilization updates, so do it here explicitly with the IOWAIT flag
Powered by blists - more mailing lists