Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750831AbdLGFFP (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Dec 2017 00:05:15 -0500 Received: from mail-pf0-f196.google.com ([209.85.192.196]:33493 "EHLO mail-pf0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750738AbdLGFFN (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Dec 2017 00:05:13 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMaDUBtidTI+ZfidcBB6mVVvgSKcSR5h1zgm4e45q7HiAweQCxYEeJ2CUE5SXE+RNKPnmwvOFQ== Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2017 10:35:09 +0530 From: Viresh Kumar To: Patrick Bellasi Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Vincent Guittot , Dietmar Eggemann , Morten Rasmussen , Juri Lelli , Todd Kjos , Joel Fernandes , Steve Muckle Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] cpufreq: schedutil: ensure max frequency while running RT/DL tasks Message-ID: <20171207050509.vfa64mbp23gnq547@vireshk-mac-ubuntu> References: <20171130114723.29210-1-patrick.bellasi@arm.com> <20171130114723.29210-3-patrick.bellasi@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171130114723.29210-3-patrick.bellasi@arm.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2661 Lines: 77 On 30-11-17, 11:47, Patrick Bellasi wrote: > diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c > index 67339ccb5595..448f49de5335 100644 > --- a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c > +++ b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c > @@ -262,6 +262,7 @@ static void sugov_update_single(struct update_util_data *hook, u64 time, > struct cpufreq_policy *policy = sg_policy->policy; > unsigned long util, max; > unsigned int next_f; > + bool rt_mode; > bool busy; > > sugov_set_iowait_boost(sg_cpu, time, flags); > @@ -272,7 +273,15 @@ static void sugov_update_single(struct update_util_data *hook, u64 time, > > busy = sugov_cpu_is_busy(sg_cpu); > > - if (flags & SCHED_CPUFREQ_RT_DL) { > + /* > + * While RT/DL tasks are running we do not want FAIR tasks to > + * overvrite this CPU's flags, still we can update utilization and > + * frequency (if required/possible) to be fair with these tasks. > + */ > + rt_mode = task_has_dl_policy(current) || > + task_has_rt_policy(current) || > + (flags & SCHED_CPUFREQ_RT_DL); > + if (rt_mode) { > next_f = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq; > } else { > sugov_get_util(&util, &max, sg_cpu->cpu); > @@ -340,6 +349,7 @@ static void sugov_update_shared(struct update_util_data *hook, u64 time, > struct sugov_policy *sg_policy = sg_cpu->sg_policy; > unsigned long util, max; > unsigned int next_f; > + bool rt_mode; > > sugov_get_util(&util, &max, sg_cpu->cpu); > > @@ -353,17 +363,27 @@ static void sugov_update_shared(struct update_util_data *hook, u64 time, > sg_cpu->flags = 0; > goto done; > } > - sg_cpu->flags = flags; > + > + /* > + * While RT/DL tasks are running we do not want FAIR tasks to > + * overwrite this CPU's flags, still we can update utilization and > + * frequency (if required/possible) to be fair with these tasks. > + */ > + rt_mode = task_has_dl_policy(current) || > + task_has_rt_policy(current) || > + (flags & SCHED_CPUFREQ_RT_DL); > + if (rt_mode) > + sg_cpu->flags |= flags; > + else > + sg_cpu->flags = flags; > > sugov_set_iowait_boost(sg_cpu, time, flags); > sg_cpu->last_update = time; > > if (sugov_should_update_freq(sg_policy, time)) { > - if (flags & SCHED_CPUFREQ_RT_DL) > - next_f = sg_policy->policy->cpuinfo.max_freq; > - else > - next_f = sugov_next_freq_shared(sg_cpu, time); > - > + next_f = rt_mode > + ? sg_policy->policy->cpuinfo.max_freq > + : sugov_next_freq_shared(sg_cpu, time); > sugov_update_commit(sg_policy, time, next_f); > } Same here. There are pending comments from V2 which no one objected to and I was looking to see those modifications here. -- viresh