linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 08/16] sched/cpufreq: uclamp: Add utilization clamping for FAIR tasks

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: <CAJZ5v0j2NQY_gKJOAy=rP5_1Dk9TODKNhW0vuvsynTN3BUmYaQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 22 Jan 2019 12:04:54 +0100
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux API <linux-api@...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>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
        Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....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 v6 08/16] sched/cpufreq: uclamp: Add utilization clamping
 for FAIR tasks

On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 12:02 PM Patrick Bellasi
<patrick.bellasi@....com> wrote:
>
> On 22-Jan 11:37, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tuesday, January 15, 2019 11:15:05 AM CET Patrick Bellasi wrote:

[cut]

> >
> > IMO it would be better to combine this patch with the next one.
>
> Main reason was to better document in the changelog what we do for the
> two different classes...
>
> > At least some things in it I was about to ask about would go away
> > then. :-)
>
> ... but if it creates confusion I can certainly merge them.
>
> Or maybe clarify better in this patch what's not clear: may I ask what
> were your questions ?
>
> > Besides, I don't really see a reason for the split here.
>
> Was mainly to make the changes required for RT more self-contained.
>
> For that class only, not for FAIR, we have additional code in the
> following patch which add uclamp_default_perf which are system
> defaults used to track/account tasks requesting the maximum frequency.
>
> Again, I can either better clarify the above patch or just merge the
> two together: what do you prefer ?

Merge the two together, please.