Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] Add basic tracing for uclamp and schedutil

[Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>]

On 5/22/23 15:40, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Hi Lukasz,
> 
> On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 3:38 PM Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Rafael,
>>
>>
>>
>> On 5/9/23 13:22, Lukasz Luba wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> The task scheduler feature: Uclamp, begins to take off. To better understand
>>> the dynamics in the task scheduler and CPU frequency requests we need some
>>> better tracing.
>>> In schedutil (cpufreq governor) we allow to enter the scheduler
>>> and make the frequency change. Although, there is some limit in regards to how
>>> often this can happen. That min period is provided by the cpufreq driver.
>>> Thus, some of the cpufreq requests might be filter out and the frequency won't
>>> be changed (hopefuly will be set a bit later). We would like to know about
>>> those situations, especially in context of the user-space hints made via
>>> Uclamp for particular tasks.
>>> This patch set aims to add base for our toolkits and post-processing trace
>>> analyzes.
>>
>>> Changelog:
>>> v2:
>>> - solved the issue from CI build warning, dropped schedutil.h and re-used
>>>     the sched.h which is available in build_utility.c where cpufreq_schedutil.c
>>>     is included
>>> - added tag for the last patch 3/3 for the CI robot helping hend
>>> - re-based on top of v6.4-rc1
>>> v1:
>>> - implementation can be found here [1]
>>>
>>
>> I was going to gently ping you, while I've realized that you
>> are not on CC list :( I don't know what happened, my apologies.
> 
> No worries.
> 
>> Shell I resend this patch set so you can have it in a proper way
>> in your mailbox?
> 
> Well, for schedutil you should also CC linux-pm (done now), so please resend it.
> 
>> Could you have a look at this, please?
> 
> I could, but if I'm to reply, it will be much more convenient for me
> if it is there in my inbox.
> 

Thanks Rafael for instant response. I'll resend it with the proper CC
list this time.