[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <deddd9cc-f517-cff9-e304-e1f09c6784b7@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:47:37 +0100
From: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: Move max CPU capacity to sugov_policy
On 7/15/22 12:44, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 10:47 AM Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Rafael,
>>
>> gentle ping.
>>
>> On 7/11/22 13:42, Lukasz Luba wrote:
>>> There is no need to keep the max CPU capacity in the per_cpu instance.
>>> Furthermore, there is no need to check and update that variable
>>> (sg_cpu->max) everytime in the frequency change request, which is part
>>> of hot path. Instead use struct sugov_policy to store that information.
>>> Initialize the max CPU capacity during the setup and start callback.
>>> We can do that since all CPUs in the same frequency domain have the same
>>> max capacity (capacity setup and thermal pressure are based on that).
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
>>> ---
>>> kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c | 30 +++++++++++++++---------------
>>> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>>
>> The patch got Ack from Viresh.
>> Could you take it?
>
> Yes, it's there in my queue. Same for the EM changes.
Thank you Rafael!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists