Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-52230-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2024 14:24:44 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To: lizhe <sensor1010@163.com>
Cc: vincent.guittot@linaro.org, ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com,
	rafael@kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq/schedutil: When updating limitations, frequency
 modulation interval not become invalid.
Message-ID: <20240205085444.2owfuruucm26txt3@vireshk-i7>
References: <20240204140928.2865-1-sensor1010@163.com>
 <20240205073814.s656yzrv56tecji3@vireshk-i7>
 <7654198e.15f6.18d78668d9b.Coremail.sensor1010@163.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <7654198e.15f6.18d78668d9b.Coremail.sensor1010@163.com>

On 05-02-24, 16:33, lizhe wrote:
> HI： 
>     I think not.
>     It will cause the following changes:
>     limits_changed in sugov_limit() is set to true.
>     This will cause the modulation interval to be invalid.
>     The system modulation will ignore the modulation interval.
>     A modulation request will be initiated immediately.
> 
> 
>    As shown below : 
>    sugov_should_update_freq(...)
>   {
>      if (unlikely(sg_policy->limits_changed)) {
>           ....
>           return true;
>      }
>   }
>   
>   Repeatedly setting the schedutil modulation policy causes the modulation interval to be invalid. 
>   Why is this necessary ? 

This is the penalty being paid to keep the interface simple and consistent.
Playing with sysfs can do such minor things.

-- 
viresh