From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, viresh.kumar@linaro.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
        tglx@linutronix.de, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, rostedt@goodmis.org,
        luca.abeni@santannapisa.it, claudio@evidence.eu.com,
        tommaso.cucinotta@santannapisa.it, bristot@redhat.com,
        mathieu.poirier@linaro.org, tkjos@android.com, joelaf@google.com,
        andresoportus@google.com, morten.rasmussen@arm.com,
        dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, patrick.bellasi@arm.com,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFD PATCH 4/5] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: always consider all CPUs when deciding next freq
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 00:41:36 +0200
Message-ID: <2348394.hDdCk9fbgK@aspire.rjw.lan>
User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.10.0+; KDE/4.14.9; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <20170324140900.7334-5-juri.lelli@arm.com>
References: <20170324140900.7334-1-juri.lelli@arm.com> <20170324140900.7334-5-juri.lelli@arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 355
Lines: 11

On Friday, March 24, 2017 02:08:59 PM Juri Lelli wrote:
> No assumption can be made upon the rate at which frequency updates get
> triggered, as there are scheduling policies (like SCHED_DEADLINE) which
> don't trigger them so frequently.
> 
> Remove such assumption from the code.

But the util/max values for idle CPUs may be stale, no?

Thanks,
Rafael