[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191126100638.pbcxnii67fihkb3g@e107158-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 10:06:38 +0000
From: Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@....com>
To: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
mingo@...nel.org, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, patrick.bellasi@...bug.net,
qperret@...gle.com, morten.rasmussen@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] sched/fair: Consider uclamp for "task fits capacity"
checks
On 11/25/19 17:33, Valentin Schneider wrote:
> With cgroups, I do recall something about allowing the cgroup *knobs* to be
> inverted, but AFAICT that gets sanitized when it trickles down to the
> scheduler via cpu_util_update_eff():
>
> eff[UCLAMP_MIN] = min(eff[UCLAMP_MIN], eff[UCLAMP_MAX]);
I missed that we cap here too.
>
> So I don't see how inversion could happen within uclamp_task_util().
> Patrick, any chance you could light up my torch?
I think I am equally confused now. A clarification that can help improving the
comment would be useful.
Thanks
--
Qais Yousef
Powered by blists - more mailing lists