[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210224064727.w3w4b66jnsmcxdff@vireshk-i7>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2021 12:17:27 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Yue Hu <zbestahu@...il.com>
Cc: rjw@...ysocki.net, mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org,
juri.lelli@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
huyue2@...ong.com, zbestahu@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cpufreq: schedutil: Call sugov_update_next_freq()
before check to fast_switch_enabled
On 24-02-21, 14:39, Yue Hu wrote:
> From: Yue Hu <huyue2@...ong.com>
>
> Note that sugov_update_next_freq() may return false, that means the
> caller sugov_fast_switch() will do nothing except fast switch check.
>
> Similarly, sugov_deferred_update() also has unnecessary operations
> of raw_spin_{lock,unlock} in sugov_update_single_freq() for that case.
>
> So, let's call sugov_update_next_freq() before the fast switch check
> to avoid unnecessary behaviors above. Accordingly, update interface
> definition to sugov_deferred_update() and remove sugov_fast_switch()
> since we will call cpufreq_driver_fast_switch() directly instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yue Hu <huyue2@...ong.com>
> ---
> v2: remove sugov_fast_switch() and call cpufreq_driver_fast_switch()
> directly instead, also update minor log message.
>
> kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c | 29 ++++++++++++-----------------
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
--
viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists