From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V6] powercap/drivers/idle_injection: Add an idle injection
 framework
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 10:13:37 +0200
Message-ID: <4eaf5987-4532-5c81-ec3a-89614bf339f5@linaro.org>
References: <1528804816-32636-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
 <20180612123036.GJ12180@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <16d5649d-863c-10c7-9287-202568e713e6@linaro.org>
 <20180612125247.GO12217@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <16770447-afe3-0fd7-19f9-1bd52c4c8ced@linaro.org>
 <20180612140654.GQ12217@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <cce05d92-d51a-ab4f-83f2-37dcdee0cd6a@linaro.org>
 <20180612155841.GT12217@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <7190a58e-05f2-216c-8b36-70692fa722bf@linaro.org>
 <20180612173514.GV12217@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20180612173514.GV12217@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: viresh.kumar@linaro.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@gmail.com>, Javi Merino <javi.merino@kernel.org>, Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>, Kevin Wangtao <kevin.wangtao@linaro.org>, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>, Rui Zhang <rui.zhang@intel.com>, Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>, Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com>
List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org

On 12/06/2018 19:35, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

[ ... ]

>>>> Yes, drifting is not an issue if that happens. This scheme is simpler
>>>> and safer than setting the timer ahead before waking up the tasks with
>>>> the risk it expires before all the tasks ended their idle cycles.
>>>
>>> sloppy though..
>>
>> Ok, do you prefer to see the timer set in the wakeup function and thus
>> having a periodic tick for the idle injection ?
> 
> I think having a HRTIMER_RESTART handler that does hrtimer_forward() is
> the most sensible. You will end up having to deal with threads not being
> ready, but I think that's not a real problem.

Thanks for the restartable timer suggestion. I'm finishing polishing the
code and definitively the result is much more nicer.


-- 
 <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog