From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2ECEC10F13 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 14:44:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A93062077C for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 14:44:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726391AbfDKOoP (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Apr 2019 10:44:15 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:54776 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726073AbfDKOoP (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Apr 2019 10:44:15 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098393.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x3BEf6LK096214 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 10:44:14 -0400 Received: from e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.98]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2rt6ugjx97-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 10:44:13 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 15:44:07 +0100 Received: from b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.196) by e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.132) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Thu, 11 Apr 2019 15:44:05 +0100 Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.60]) by b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x3BEi4Ku35258466 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 11 Apr 2019 14:44:04 GMT Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42BEE4204B; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 14:44:04 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AD3242045; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 14:44:03 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [9.85.68.79]) by d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 14:44:03 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [RFC 1/6] Optimize wake-up task for Task Packing heuristic To: Dietmar Eggemann , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org References: <20190322060621.27021-1-parth015@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20190322060621.27021-2-parth015@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <0b198386-ef0b-75e0-e53a-1160c77326b7@arm.com> <60e34244-1e40-e318-080e-e76607bb3d92@linux.vnet.ibm.com> From: Parth Shah Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 20:14:02 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 19041114-0008-0000-0000-000002D8C8B2 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19041114-0009-0000-0000-00002244F11A Message-Id: <3df9024a-b5a9-434e-8608-216fa93eaad8@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-04-11_09:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1904110100 Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On 4/10/19 10:03 PM, Dietmar Eggemann wrote: > On 4/7/19 7:57 AM, Parth Shah wrote: >> >> >> On 3/27/19 3:01 PM, Dietmar Eggemann wrote: >>> Hi Parth, >>> >>> On 3/22/19 7:06 AM, Parth Shah wrote: > > [...] > >>>> +    for_each_cpu_wrap(core, cpus, prev_cpu) >>>> +    { >>>> +        long unsigned int core_util = 0; >>>> +        long unsigned int core_cap = core_cap_mf*capacity_of(core)/10; >>>> +        long unsigned int cache_cpu_util = (unsigned)-1; >>>> +        long unsigned est_util = 0, est_util_enqueued = 0; >>>> +        int cache_cpu = core; >>>> +        struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq; >>>> + >>>> +        for_each_cpu(smt, cpu_smt_mask(core)) { >>> >>> This one doesn't build for me on arm64 (make defconfig) since it uses cpu_smt_mask() outside the CONFIG_SCHED_SMT guard. >>> >>> kernel/sched/fair.c: In function ‘select_non_idle_core’: >>> kernel/sched/fair.c:6243:21: error: implicit declaration of function ‘cpu_smt_mask’; did you mean ‘cpu_cpu_mask’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] >>>     for_each_cpu(smt, cpu_smt_mask(core)) { >>>                       ^ >>> ./include/linux/cpumask.h:242:32: note: in definition of macro ‘for_each_cpu’ >>> >>> [...] >>> >> >> Thanks for pointing out. It will not build for individual patches for the current version of RFC. >> >> Please try to build it with full patch set. I assure, the following iterations of RFC will resolve this issue. > > Ah, I see, you have this CONFIG_TURBO_SCHED patch at the end of the series. I think that you will have a hard time to get new CONFIG switches into the task scheduler code. Can you not bting in your feature w/o CONFIG_TURBO_SCHED? > > [...] > Yes, that seems doable. I will remove the additional CONFIG option and modify the code so that it builds for arm64 as well. Thanks.