Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Mon, 15 Feb 2021 15:10:46 +0800
From:   Yue Hu <zbestahu@gmail.com>
To:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc:     Yue Hu <zbestahu@163.com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Benjamin Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Yue Hu <huyue2@yulong.com>, zhangwen@yulong.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: Don't use the limits_changed flag
 any more
Message-ID: <20210215151046.00001894.zbestahu@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210215063008.hsdkrs4bw7wt3wye@vireshk-i7>
References: <20210208030723.781-1-zbestahu@gmail.com>
        <CAJZ5v0hmgQp--uhRMZbqZnOvQPy9zLfQx_u=xAewmV=LgT6rPA@mail.gmail.com>
        <20210214114421.00000550.zbestahu@163.com>
        <20210215063008.hsdkrs4bw7wt3wye@vireshk-i7>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 15 Feb 2021 12:00:08 +0530
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:

> On 14-02-21, 11:44, Yue Hu wrote:
> > On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 17:14:03 +0100
> > "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:  
> > > This may be running in parallel with sugov_update_next_freq() on a
> > > different CPU, so the latter may clear need_freq_update right
> > > after it has been set here unless I'm overlooking something.  
> > 
> > Whether this logic is also happening for limits_changed in
> > sugo_should_update_freq() or not?  
> 
> It is but it shouldn't have any side effects as we calculate the next
> frequency after cleaning the limits_changed flag. Your patch would
> have been fine, but it is not anymore because of commit 23a881852f3e
> ("cpufreq: schedutil: Don't skip freq update if need_freq_update is
> set").
> 
> It made a considerable change after which your patch adds a bug. With
> 23a881852f3e, need_freq_update is updated/cleared after the next
> frequency is calculated, while earlier it was cleared before it. And
> so even with the race condition taking place, there were no issues.
> 

Okay, clear.