[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAB8ipk8tdA7tB3yJQSeVW1vz6W9PDzqWoU3tv2XdDcoSrhbEqA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 20:05:37 +0800
From: Xuewen Yan <xuewen.yan94@...il.com>
To: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Benjamin Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@...bug.net>,
Chunyan Zhang <zhang.lyra@...il.com>,
Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>,
Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/uclamp: Fix getting unreasonable ucalmp_max when rq
is idle
On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 7:31 PM Valentin Schneider
<valentin.schneider@....com> wrote:
>
> On 30/06/21 09:24, Xuewen Yan wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 9:50 PM Valentin Schneider
> > <valentin.schneider@....com> wrote:
> >> + min_util = max_t(unsigned long, min_util, READ_ONCE(rq->uclamp[UCLAMP_MIN].value));
> >> + max_util = max_t(unsigned long, max_util, READ_ONCE(rq->uclamp[UCLAMP_MAX].value));
> >
> > Is it necessary to use max_t here? although it is not the main problem...
> >
>
> I got comparison warnings when using a regular max() - the RQ clamp values
> are unsigned int, whereas the local variable is unsigned long.
Yes,I miss the rq clamp value's type.
Thanks!
xuewen
Powered by blists - more mailing lists