From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Should we add Android's Interactive governor into mainline
 now?
Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 08:51:56 +0530
Message-ID: <20160513032156.GE3415@vireshk-i7>
References: <CAKohponvfRR=nDPcVWpW0L1JZO9+7hgLL7YrWwyJXkL8BtJNpg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160512163648.GB12886@graphite.smuckle.net>
 <CAJZ5v0jYqLKf-ckpEm7dm_jHeUkD6ey_cAgdrgFFuFnMYa-HUw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160512211012.GA28594@graphite.smuckle.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-pf0-f174.google.com ([209.85.192.174]:36808 "EHLO
	mail-pf0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751438AbcEMDWA (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>); Thu, 12 May 2016 23:22:00 -0400
Received: by mail-pf0-f174.google.com with SMTP id c189so38704339pfb.3
        for <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>; Thu, 12 May 2016 20:22:00 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160512211012.GA28594@graphite.smuckle.net>
Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
To: Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@linaro.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Linaro Kernel Mailman List <linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Morten Rasmussen <Morten.Rasmussen@arm.com>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>

On 12-05-16, 14:10, Steve Muckle wrote:
> By far the biggest user of interactive is Android (I'm not aware of its
> use elsewhere). Persuading Google to switch is relatively doable once a
> viable alternative exists. After that point I'd expect the desire to
> merge and maintain interactive would almost immediately disappear. Folks
> wanting to run upstream kernels on already released devices have much
> bigger hurdles than merging the interactive governor.
> 
> But if interactive is merged I'm worried that many other users on random
> platforms will adopt it, for whatever reason, introducing a support
> burden during a time that we're trying to develop and encourage an
> alternative.

Lets assume that its going to take enough time for (specially) Android to start
using the schedutil governor. That's how it works.

So, if we are worried about new users using it (who may not have a good reason
to do that but did it by mistake), maybe we can make the interactive governor
depend on CONFIG_ARM.

> Anyway that's just my $.02 - it'd actually be good for me as
> again it'd permit easier comparison with schedutil, so I won't complain
> if it goes in :) .

-- 
viresh