[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201023061246.irzbrl62baoawmqv@vireshk-i7>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 11:42:46 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...ia.fr>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>,
Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@...ia.fr>,
srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: check for idle core
On 22-10-20, 13:45, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thursday, October 22, 2020 12:47:03 PM CEST Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > And I am not really sure why we always wanted this backup performance
> > governor to be there unless the said governors are built as module.
>
> Apparently, some old drivers had problems with switching frequencies fast enough
> for ondemand to be used with them and the fallback was for those cases. AFAICS.
Do we still need this ? Or better ask those platforms to individually
enable both of them.
--
viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists