Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220711124229.16516-1-lukasz.luba@arm.com> <1198724e-d94f-0b7c-9c4a-90595f8426d2@arm.com>
In-Reply-To: <1198724e-d94f-0b7c-9c4a-90595f8426d2@arm.com>
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Date:   Fri, 15 Jul 2022 13:44:09 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0gh78z3tw6simaZ5S6dmGvDc-OE6t02N8vQYk-2eoFQgA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: Move max CPU capacity to sugov_policy
To:     Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 10:47 AM Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Rafael,
>
> gentle ping.
>
> On 7/11/22 13:42, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> > There is no need to keep the max CPU capacity in the per_cpu instance.
> > Furthermore, there is no need to check and update that variable
> > (sg_cpu->max) everytime in the frequency change request, which is part
> > of hot path. Instead use struct sugov_policy to store that information.
> > Initialize the max CPU capacity during the setup and start callback.
> > We can do that since all CPUs in the same frequency domain have the same
> > max capacity (capacity setup and thermal pressure are based on that).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
> > ---
> >   kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c | 30 +++++++++++++++---------------
> >   1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> The patch got Ack from Viresh.
> Could you take it?

Yes, it's there in my queue.  Same for the EM changes.