Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 11:00:24 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Mike Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org>
Cc: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>, mingo@redhat.com,
        dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, pjt@google.com, bsegall@google.com,
        vincent.guittot@linaro.org, nicolas.pitre@linaro.org,
        rjw@rjwysocki.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        tuukka.tikkanen@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] sched: cfs: introduce capacity_ops
Message-ID: <20141009090024.GR10832@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20141008060712.4379.42509@quantum>
 <1412749572-29449-1-git-send-email-mturquette@linaro.org>
 <1412749572-29449-2-git-send-email-mturquette@linaro.org>
 <20141008083721.GE10832@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20141008232836.4379.3339@quantum>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20141008232836.4379.3339@quantum>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22.1 (2013-10-16)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 04:28:36PM -0700, Mike Turquette wrote:
> > Yeah, like hell no. We do not want modules to affect scheduler
> > behaviour.
> 
> If a CPUfreq driver is the best place to know how frequency affects the
> capacity of a CPU for a given system, are you suggesting that we must
> compile that code into the kernel image instead of it being a loadable
> module?

Ideally we'll end up doing away with the cpufreq policy modules and
integrate the entire thing into the scheduler.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/