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:   Wed, 24 Feb 2021 12:17:27 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To:     Yue Hu <zbestahu@gmail.com>
Cc:     rjw@rjwysocki.net, mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org,
        juri.lelli@redhat.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org,
        linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        huyue2@yulong.com, zbestahu@163.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cpufreq: schedutil: Call sugov_update_next_freq()
 before check to fast_switch_enabled
Message-ID: <20210224064727.w3w4b66jnsmcxdff@vireshk-i7>
References: <20210224063927.1298-1-zbestahu@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210224063927.1298-1-zbestahu@gmail.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716-391-311a52
Precedence: bulk

On 24-02-21, 14:39, Yue Hu wrote:
> From: Yue Hu <huyue2@yulong.com>
> 
> Note that sugov_update_next_freq() may return false, that means the
> caller sugov_fast_switch() will do nothing except fast switch check.
> 
> Similarly, sugov_deferred_update() also has unnecessary operations
> of raw_spin_{lock,unlock} in sugov_update_single_freq() for that case.
> 
> So, let's call sugov_update_next_freq() before the fast switch check
> to avoid unnecessary behaviors above. Accordingly, update interface
> definition to sugov_deferred_update() and remove sugov_fast_switch()
> since we will call cpufreq_driver_fast_switch() directly instead.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yue Hu <huyue2@yulong.com>
> ---
> v2: remove sugov_fast_switch() and call cpufreq_driver_fast_switch()
>     directly instead, also update minor log message.
> 
>  kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c | 29 ++++++++++++-----------------
>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-- 
viresh