From: Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Claudio Scordino <claudio@evidence.eu.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>,
Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@santannapisa.it>,
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] sched/cpufreq/schedutil: handling urgent frequency requests
Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 00:01:13 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180509070113.GB52784@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180509065449.c5zotxqmuyatjgfd@vireshk-i7>
On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 12:24:49PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 09-05-18, 08:45, Juri Lelli wrote:
> > On 08/05/18 21:54, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > Isn't this potentially introducing unneeded irq pressure (and doing the
> > whole wakeup the kthread thing), while the already active kthread could
> > simply handle multiple back-to-back requests before going to sleep?
>
> And then we may need more instances of the work item and need to store
> a different value of next_freq with each work item, as we can't use
> the common one anymore as there would be races around accessing it ?
Exactly. I think it also doesn't make sense to over write an already
committed request either so better to store them separate (?). After the
"commit", that previous request is done..
- Joel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-09 7:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-07 14:43 Claudio Scordino
2018-05-08 6:54 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-05-08 12:32 ` Claudio Scordino
2018-05-08 20:40 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-05-09 4:54 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-05-09 6:45 ` Juri Lelli
2018-05-09 6:54 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-05-09 7:01 ` Joel Fernandes [this message]
2018-05-09 8:05 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-05-09 8:22 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-05-09 8:41 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-05-09 8:23 ` Juri Lelli
2018-05-09 8:25 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-05-09 8:41 ` Juri Lelli
2018-05-09 6:55 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-05-09 8:06 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-05-09 8:30 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-05-09 8:40 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-05-09 9:02 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-05-09 9:28 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-05-09 10:34 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-05-09 8:51 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-05-09 9:06 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-05-09 9:39 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-05-09 9:48 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180509070113.GB52784@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com \
--to=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=claudio@evidence.eu.com \
--cc=joelaf@google.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luca.abeni@santannapisa.it \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=patrick.bellasi@arm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®