Re: [RFC patch v3 02/20] sched: Several fixes for cache aware scheduling

[Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>]

On Fri, 2025-07-04 at 01:03 +0530, Shrikanth Hegde wrote:
> 
> 
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/features.h b/kernel/sched/features.h
> > index 3c12d9f93331..d2af7bfd36bf 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/features.h
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/features.h
> > @@ -87,6 +87,7 @@ SCHED_FEAT(TTWU_QUEUE, true)
> >    */
> >   SCHED_FEAT(SIS_UTIL, true)
> >   
> > +SCHED_FEAT(SCHED_CACHE, true)
> 
> Having both SCHED_FEAT and CONFIG_SCHED_CACHE seems like overkill.
> Is it really necessary to have both?

As Peter pointed out previously, a runtime knob is still preferable.

> 
> Also, given the complexity it brings and only a workloads which spawns threads
> which have data sharing among them benefit, it could be false by default.

That's true. We'll try to address such cases in the next version with a
default behavior that's more conservative.

Tim
> 
> >   /*
> >    * Issue a WARN when we do multiple update_rq_clock() calls
> >    * in a single rq->lock section. Default disabled because the
>