From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] sched: idle: Add sched balance option Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 13:21:20 +0200 Message-ID: <20140428112120.GH27561@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <1398342291-16322-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> <535911DC.9050109@linaro.org> <2713863.BLQTYQm2Oa@vostro.rjw.lan> <20140425132055.GC11096@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <535A94E3.5080004@linaro.org> <20140425184327.GH26782@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net> <535E28D0.7050502@linaro.org> <20140428102819.GG27561@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <535E3673.8020606@linaro.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <535E3673.8020606@linaro.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Daniel Lezcano Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Amit Kucheria , Ingo Molnar , Lists linaro-kernel , Linux PM list , Linux Kernel Mailing List List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 01:07:31PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > I'm really wondering if the cgroup couldn't be a good solution: most my kernels don't have no stinking cgroups ;-)