From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from wp530.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp530.webpack.hosteurope.de [80.237.130.52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17F8D14B820; Sat, 24 Feb 2024 14:31:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=80.237.130.52 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708785092; cv=none; b=Y7rudEiOpBMSMDATLwer5lfr/mpxpBeMtqdusiIHfZpuq0t+ayM/s4SXYLsunhYCsGwIIZ24tipnw52hq0UzPJ/t4Qwj4SMwQZTtMmSfc7Ls/sr2tj3GG0Vn2a6EmxLzBzShEqZqQi7jAn1ga/+BoYbxq0SJWKYYloUyeLPdoVM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708785092; c=relaxed/simple; bh=rp/h+IP7q6vVjrjiIaB/eBbUj7Tff2g1IBWRmxNzmlE=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=BSObhiVzADI3n4fcwpsdMZ+4NMFK4qqTEp9lE/yHQT4+IGuYGJn/O5fslIrsax1vW1fn8uFb5fKi7SO6hrS0P+lZwRPhO4ugKA4o17woc5/XLKExb/oGU/6vU1vtVnlXbzuDlwgXzPRfCQd177zVhprtCBbQssA+6O8vfuXZffI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=leemhuis.info; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=leemhuis.info; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=leemhuis.info header.i=@leemhuis.info header.b=MJC1Wulx; arc=none smtp.client-ip=80.237.130.52 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=leemhuis.info Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=leemhuis.info Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=leemhuis.info header.i=@leemhuis.info header.b="MJC1Wulx" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=leemhuis.info; s=he214686; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: In-Reply-To:Reply-To:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description: In-Reply-To:References; bh=YEmV7dFKFaJpVYI86wjLhEPnZQ01RauyXSO8LRhg7dM=; t=1708785090; x=1709217090; b=MJC1WulxB5Mc0AYrTa35NmOhpJqLs2qcfORCTj6TWhJ4uNp pT3dR4tfBJ+VCHNBnN/H8mM8+11ubCbZF552G3/jMW0YmT9ORJWXIa1x2cUOcamItal9A/Ea/dZmd 51lgq0lMJAODy4j5K6PVMgmKe2ITbeYH5IacO3tM6sHuAmbtiAFfaME/jzgP7f+swgP7nrI5F5t4Q VqwTF9j906i6FWG4YZ/Iihu6cb85i5oIHEIoAmObwrYWbbOkKMgQvylqKWb1AyRKX/m7jRro6M3jh A1Ni3pqg1fcqVEDsXUi8Q9xr2wlAQSqi3fqp0Dmuj1g6ZYMJrQpfAHRP5VqlvGCw==; Received: from [2a02:8108:8980:2478:8cde:aa2c:f324:937e]; authenticated by wp530.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) id 1rdt3m-0003og-Om; Sat, 24 Feb 2024 15:31:26 +0100 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2024 15:31:26 +0100 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: sched/cpufreq: Rework schedutil governor performance estimation - Regression bisected Content-Language: en-US, de-DE To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux regressions mailing list Cc: Vincent Guittot , Doug Smythies , Srinivas Pandruvada , Ingo Molnar , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <002f01da5ba0$49cbf810$dd63e830$@telus.net> <003801da5bae$02d6f550$0884dff0$@telus.net> <000b01da5d09$8219f900$864deb00$@telus.net> <001b01da5ea7$86c7a070$9456e150$@telus.net> <003001da6061$bbad1e30$33075a90$@telus.net> From: "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)" Reply-To: Linux regressions mailing list In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;regressions@leemhuis.info;1708785090;92a8baa2; X-HE-SMSGID: 1rdt3m-0003og-Om On 24.02.24 15:11, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Sat, Feb 24, 2024 at 2:44 PM Linux regression tracking (Thorsten > Leemhuis) wrote: >> >> On 16.02.24 14:17, Vincent Guittot wrote: >>> On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 at 23:53, Doug Smythies wrote: >>>> >>>> This email thread appears as if it might be moving away from a regression >>>> caused by your commit towards a conclusion that your commit exposed >>>> a pre-existing bug in the intel_psate.c code. >>> Ok >> >> Well, even in that case it's a regression that must be fixed -- ideally >> before 6.8. Did anything happen towards that? >> >> I noticed that Doug send the fix "cpufreq: intel_pstate: fix pstate >> limits enforcement for adjust_perf call back": >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240217213010.2466-1-dsmythies@telus.net/ >> >> Is that supposed to fix the problem? Looks a bit like it, but I'm not >> totally sure. In that case I'd say it likely should be applied to 6.8, >> but Rafael apparently applied it to 6.9. > > This hasn't reached linux-next yet, so I rebased it on top of -rc5 in > order to push it as a 6.8 fix. Ahh, great, many thx! >> I'd also say that a Fixes: would be good as well (to ensure that fix is >> also backported in case anyone backports 9c0b4bb7f630), but I know that >> subsystems handle this differently. > > So I added a Fixes: tag to it, but it points to the original change > that missed the check. Yeah, that totally works for me as well. Again: many thx! Ciao, Thorsten