From: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com (Dietmar Eggemann)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/6] drivers base/arch_topology: frequency-invariant load-tracking support
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 17:40:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56b6e983-d086-a0e4-92c3-80d371e0d167@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKfTPtBnUWyAWTMJ2H8C+SPT+fVj-NkAs_pdOu+_a1zJ=VXZdA@mail.gmail.com>
On 14/06/17 14:08, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On 14 June 2017 at 09:55, Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 06/12/2017 04:27 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>>> On 8 June 2017 at 09:55, Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> wrote:
[...]
>>
>> Yes, we should free cpus_to_visit if the policy notifier registration
>> fails. But IMHO also, once the parsing of the capacity-dmips-mhz property
>> is done. free cpus_to_visit is only used in the notifier call
>> init_cpu_capacity_callback() after being allocated and initialized in
>> register_cpufreq_notifier().
>>
>> We could add something like this as the first patch of this set. Only
>> mildly tested on Juno. Juri, what do you think?
>>
>> Author: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
>> Date: Tue Jun 13 23:21:59 2017 +0100
>>
>> drivers base/arch_topology: free cpumask cpus_to_visit
>>
>> Free cpumask cpus_to_visit in case registering
>> init_cpu_capacity_notifier has failed or the parsing of the cpu
>> capacity-dmips-mhz property is done. The cpumask cpus_to_visit is
>> only used inside the notifier call init_cpu_capacity_callback.
>>
>> Reported-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
>
> your proposal for freeing cpus_to_visit looks good for me
>
> Acked-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Thanks.
[...]
>> IMHO, that's not necessary.
>>
>> The transition notifier works completely independent from the policy
>> notifier. In case the latter gets registered correctly and the registration
>> of the former fails, the notifier call of the policy notifier still parses
>> the capacity-dmips-mhz property information and sets per_cpu(max_freq, cpu).
>>
>> The notifier call set_freq_scale_callback() of the transition notifier will
>> not be called so that frequency invariance always returns
>> SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE.
>>
>> After the policy notifier has finished its work, it schedules
>> parsing_done_work() in which it gets unregistered.
>
> Ok so IIUC, the transition notifier is somehow optional and we still
> have the cpu invariance.
> In this case, you should not return the error code of
> cpufreq_register_notifier(&set_freq_scale_notifier,
> CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER) as the error code of the
> register_cpufreq_notifier function.
> you should better print a warning like " failed to init frequency
> invariance" and return 0 for register_cpufreq_notifier()
Makes sense. Will change this.
[...]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-06-21 16:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-06-08 7:55 [PATCH 0/6] arm, arm64: frequency- and cpu-invariant accounting support for task scheduler Dietmar Eggemann
2017-06-08 7:55 ` [PATCH 1/6] drivers base/arch_topology: prepare cpufreq policy notifier for frequency-invariant load-tracking support Dietmar Eggemann
2017-06-12 14:45 ` Vincent Guittot
2017-06-08 7:55 ` [PATCH 2/6] drivers base/arch_topology: " Dietmar Eggemann
2017-06-12 14:27 ` Vincent Guittot
2017-06-14 7:55 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2017-06-14 13:08 ` Vincent Guittot
2017-06-15 8:28 ` Juri Lelli
2017-06-21 16:40 ` Dietmar Eggemann [this message]
2017-06-20 6:17 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-06-21 0:31 ` Saravana Kannan
2017-06-21 5:37 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-06-21 16:57 ` Morten Rasmussen
2017-06-22 4:06 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-06-22 9:59 ` Morten Rasmussen
2017-06-21 17:08 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2017-06-21 16:38 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2017-06-22 3:55 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-06-26 8:28 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2017-06-08 7:55 ` [PATCH 3/6] arm: wire frequency-invariant accounting support up to the task scheduler Dietmar Eggemann
2017-06-12 14:30 ` Vincent Guittot
2017-06-08 7:55 ` [PATCH 4/6] arm: wire cpu-invariant " Dietmar Eggemann
2017-06-12 14:31 ` Vincent Guittot
2017-06-08 7:55 ` [PATCH 5/6] arm64: wire frequency-invariant " Dietmar Eggemann
2017-06-12 13:06 ` Catalin Marinas
2017-06-12 14:32 ` Vincent Guittot
2017-06-08 7:55 ` [PATCH 6/6] arm64: wire cpu-invariant " Dietmar Eggemann
2017-06-12 13:07 ` Catalin Marinas
2017-06-12 14:33 ` Vincent Guittot
2017-06-12 13:00 ` [PATCH 0/6] arm, arm64: frequency- and cpu-invariant accounting support for " Juri Lelli
2017-06-12 13:04 ` Juri Lelli
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=56b6e983-d086-a0e4-92c3-80d371e0d167@arm.com \
--to=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox