Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751279AbaJITAz (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Oct 2014 15:00:55 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:48740 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751002AbaJITAr (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Oct 2014 15:00:47 -0400 Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 21:00:35 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Mike Turquette Cc: Morten Rasmussen , 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: <20141009190035.GB10832@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> <20141009090024.GR10832@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20141009173433.4379.58492@quantum> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20141009173433.4379.58492@quantum> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22.1 (2013-10-16) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 10:34:33AM -0700, Mike Turquette wrote: > Quoting Peter Zijlstra (2014-10-09 02:00:24) > > 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. > > I said "CPUfreq driver", not "CPUfreq governor". Certainly the scheduler > can pick a capacity state/p-state/frequency and, in doing so, replace > the CPUfreq policy bits. > > My question above was about the necessity to select the right CPUfreq > driver at compile-time and lose support for those drivers to be loadable > modules. Sounds like a bad idea. Drivers should not care one way or another. -- 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/