From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tim Chen Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 10/10] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Use CPPC to get max performance Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 12:01:41 -0700 Message-ID: <1474570901.3916.198.camel@linux.intel.com> References: <1474485552-141429-1-git-send-email-srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> <1474485552-141429-11-git-send-email-srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> <1474570233.3916.197.camel@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Srinivas Pandruvada , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , the arch/x86 maintainers , Linux PM , Linux Kernel Mailing List , ACPI Devel Maling List , Peter Zijlstra , jolsa@redhat.com List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2016-09-22 at 20:56 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Thu, 22 Sep 2016, Tim Chen wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2016-09-21 at 22:30 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > > > My current understanding is that we need to rebuild sched domains > > > after setting the priorities,  > > No, that's not true.  We need to rebuild the sched domains only > > when the sched domain flags are changed, not when we are changing > > the priorities.  Only the sched domain flag is a property of > > the sched domain. CPU priority values are not part of sched domain. > > > > Morten had similar question about whether we need to rebuild sched domain > > when we change cpu priorities when we first post the patches.  > > Peter has explained that it wasn't necessary. > > http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1608.3/01753.html > And why is there no explanation in form of a comment in the code? Sure, I'll add a comment. Thanks. Tim