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:   Mon, 24 Jun 2019 10:46:07 -0700
From:   Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To:     Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
        Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
        Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
        Todd Kjos <tkjos@google.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>,
        Steve Muckle <smuckle@google.com>,
        Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
        Alessio Balsini <balsini@android.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 13/16] sched/core: uclamp: Propagate parent clamps
Message-ID: <20190624174607.GQ657710@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com>
References: <20190621084217.8167-1-patrick.bellasi@arm.com>
 <20190621084217.8167-14-patrick.bellasi@arm.com>
 <20190622150750.GN657710@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com>
 <20190624173405.enrxqalaqinbgsut@e110439-lin>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190624173405.enrxqalaqinbgsut@e110439-lin>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hello, Patrick.

On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 06:34:05PM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 09:42:14AM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> > > Since it can be interesting for userspace, e.g. system management
> > > software, to know exactly what the currently propagated/enforced
> > > configuration is, the effective clamp values are exposed to user-space
> > > by means of a new pair of read-only attributes
> > > cpu.util.{min,max}.effective.
> > 
> > Can we not add the effective interface file for now?
> 
> You mean just the (read-only) user-space API right?

Yeah.

> I found it quite convenient, even just for debugging.
> Moreover it allows a container to know what it's exactly getting...

I fully agree.

> > I don't think it's a bad idea but would like to think more about it.
> > For cpuset, it was needed because configuration was so interwoven
> > with the effective masks, but we don't generally do this for other
> > min/max or weight knobs, all of which have effective hierarchical
> > values and I'm not quite sure about adding .effective for all of
> > them.
> > It could be that that's what we end up doing eventually but
> > I'd like to think a bit more about it.
> 
> ... but I see your point and, since it's not strictly required, I
> think we can drop it in v11. Will check better if it's of any use
> apart from debugging/testing support.

Yeah, I just wanna figure out a plan which works for other controllers
too.  It could be that the right thing to do is just adding .effective
to everything but idk I need to think more about it.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun