linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] Add utilization clamping support

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20180717130357.GA17824@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com>
Date:   Tue, 17 Jul 2018 06:03:57 -0700
From:   Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
To:     Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Todd Kjos <tkjos@...gle.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>,
        Steve Muckle <smuckle@...gle.com>,
        Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] Add utilization clamping support

On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 09:28:54AM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> This is a respin of:
> 
>    https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20180409165615.2326-1-patrick.bellasi@arm.com
> 
> which addresses all the feedbacks collected from the LKML discussion as well
> as during the presentation at last OSPM Summit:
> 
>    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Yv9smm9i78
> 
> Further comments and feedbacks are more than welcome!
> 
[...] 
> 
> Patrick Bellasi (12):
>   sched/core: uclamp: extend sched_setattr to support utilization
>     clamping
>   sched/core: uclamp: map TASK's clamp values into CPU's clamp groups
>   sched/core: uclamp: add CPU's clamp groups accounting
>   sched/core: uclamp: update CPU's refcount on clamp changes
>   sched/cpufreq: uclamp: add utilization clamping for FAIR tasks
>   sched/cpufreq: uclamp: add utilization clamping for RT tasks
>   sched/core: uclamp: enforce last task UCLAMP_MAX
>   sched/core: uclamp: extend cpu's cgroup controller
>   sched/core: uclamp: map TG's clamp values into CPU's clamp groups
>   sched/core: uclamp: use TG's clamps to restrict Task's clamps
>   sched/core: uclamp: update CPU's refcount on TG's clamp changes
>   sched/core: uclamp: use percentage clamp values
> 
>  Documentation/admin-guide/cgroup-v2.rst |  25 +
>  include/linux/sched.h                   |  53 ++
>  include/uapi/linux/sched.h              |   4 +-
>  include/uapi/linux/sched/types.h        |  66 +-
>  init/Kconfig                            |  63 ++
>  kernel/sched/core.c                     | 876 ++++++++++++++++++++++++

While I'm reviewing these patches, I had a quick thought. core.c is already
7k+ lines. Based on this diffstat, does it make sense for uclamp to be in its
own kernel/sched/uclamp.c file?

thanks,

- Joel