From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Juri Lelli Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/6] cpufreq: schedutil: ignore sugov kthreads Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 17:12:20 +0100 Message-ID: <20171130161220.GK9903@localhost.localdomain> References: <20171130114723.29210-1-patrick.bellasi@arm.com> <20171130114723.29210-7-patrick.bellasi@arm.com> <20171130134155.GF9903@localhost.localdomain> <20171130160234.GG31247@e110439-lin> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171130160234.GG31247@e110439-lin> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Patrick Bellasi Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Viresh Kumar , Vincent Guittot , Dietmar Eggemann , Morten Rasmussen , Todd Kjos , Joel Fernandes List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On 30/11/17 16:02, Patrick Bellasi wrote: > On 30-Nov 14:41, Juri Lelli wrote: [...] > > If the DL changes (which I shall post again as soon as tip/sched/core is > > bumped up to 4.15-rc1) get in first, this is going to be useless (as the > > DL kthread gets ignored by the scheduling class itself). But, this looks > > good to me "in the meantime". > > Just to better understand, you mean that the DL kthread does not send > out schedutil updates? It doesn't have a "proper" bandwidth (utilization) :/. So it gets "unnoticed" and schedutil updates are not triggered. > > If that's the case I agree we can discard this patch... that's also > one of the reasons why I move it at the end of this series. Not sure about this though, not my call :). I guess this still helps until we get the DL changes in. Best, Juri