Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-23972-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <ZTz9RpZxfxysYCmt@gmail.com> <ZZwBi/YmnMqm7zrO@gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=wgWcYX2oXKtgvNN2LLDXP7kXkbo-xTfumEjmPbjSer2RQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=wiXpsxMcQb7MhL-AxOityTajK0G8eWeBOzX-qBJ9X2DSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=wjK28MUqBZzBSMEM8vdJhDOuXGSWPmmp04GEt9CXtW6Pw@mail.gmail.com>
 <ZZ+ixagkxRPYyTCE@vingu-book> <CAHk-=wj75Er8k4QY-KF34NBCWkDpr3D26XptOpkfDcTyGEA7iA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=whK-cuBUQ2hECtkGu3LR-ipai+tmB85M=C7n3b1M8B4gQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=whK-cuBUQ2hECtkGu3LR-ipai+tmB85M=C7n3b1M8B4gQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2024 19:16:18 +0100
Message-ID: <CAKfTPtCnT9VLqiQGL5kyhzqv=WAUNRA3tVDVoKjB7jX-00Un+g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Scheduler changes for v6.8
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, 
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>, Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>, 
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, 
	Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>, Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 at 18:53, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 at 09:45, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 at 00:11, Vincent Guittot
> > <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Could you confirm that cpufreq governor is schedutil and the driver is
> > > amd-pstate on your system ?
> >
> > schedutil yes, amd-pstate no. I actually just use acpi_cpufreq
>
> Bah. Hit 'send' mistakenly too soon, thus the abrupt end and
> unfinished quoting removal.
>
> And don't ask me why it's acpi_pstate-driven. I have X86_AMD_PSTATE=y, but
>
>     /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy0/scaling_driver
>
> clearly says 'acpi-cpufreq'. Maybe I'm looking in the wrong place. My dmesg says

That seems to be the right place to look

>
>     amd_pstate: the _CPC object is not present in SBIOS or ACPI disabled
>
> which is presumably the reason my machine uses acpi-pstate.
>
> I will also test out your other questions, but I need to go back and
> do more pull requests first.

ok, thanks

I'm going to continue checking what else could trigger such regression
having in mind that your system should not have beeb impacted by this
changes


>
>               Linus