From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1752933AbdK3QMZ (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 30 Nov 2017 11:12:25 -0500
Received: from mail-wr0-f193.google.com ([209.85.128.193]:37287 "EHLO
        mail-wr0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1752209AbdK3QMY (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 30 Nov 2017 11:12:24 -0500
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMYv8jPPbXFKvDYCfb3+b/kQPZ9f6+QgteMWVM3txKLB7/4m6ls5zWzbP/jPpE8tav0dxXW3/Q==
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 17:12:20 +0100
From: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
To: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
        Todd Kjos <tkjos@android.com>, Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/6] cpufreq: schedutil: ignore sugov kthreads
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
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20171130160234.GG31247@e110439-lin>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@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