linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 06/11] cpufreq/schedutil: use dl utilization tracking

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAKfTPtAMqCF_J2gOwPtixsOUjPYg1krKP5u7PcJ3dDbuNJv1mw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 22 Jun 2018 19:22:48 +0200
From:   Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Morten Rasmussen <Morten.Rasmussen@....com>,
        viresh kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>,
        Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
        Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 06/11] cpufreq/schedutil: use dl utilization tracking

On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 at 17:24, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 02:09:49PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > -      * Ideally we would like to set util_dl as min/guaranteed freq and
> > -      * util_cfs + util_dl as requested freq. However, cpufreq is not yet
> > -      * ready for such an interface. So, we only do the latter for now.
>
> Please don't delete that comment. It is not less relevant.

ok i will keep it in next version

>
> > -static inline unsigned long cpu_util_dl(struct rq *rq)
> > +static inline unsigned long cpu_bw_dl(struct rq *rq)
>
> I think you forgot to fix-up ignore_dl_rate_limit().

yes you're right