Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 9 Feb 2018 14:10:39 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To:     Claudio Scordino <claudio@evidence.eu.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Todd Kjos <tkjos@android.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: rate limits for SCHED_DEADLINE
Message-ID: <20180209084039.GZ28462@vireshk-i7>
References: <1518109302-8239-1-git-send-email-claudio@evidence.eu.com>
 <20180209035143.GX28462@vireshk-i7>
 <197c26ba-c2a6-2de7-dffa-5b884079f746@evidence.eu.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <197c26ba-c2a6-2de7-dffa-5b884079f746@evidence.eu.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 09-02-18, 09:02, Claudio Scordino wrote:
> If I'm not wrong, at the hardware level we do have a physical rate limit (as we cannot trigger a frequency update when there is one already on-going).
> Don't know if this could somehow mitigate such effect.

Yeah, so in the worst case we will start a new freq-change right after
the previous one has finished.

-- 
viresh