From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755707AbeEHUgn (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 May 2018 16:36:43 -0400 Received: from mail-oi0-f68.google.com ([209.85.218.68]:40676 "EHLO mail-oi0-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752749AbeEHUgm (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 May 2018 16:36:42 -0400 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZoU4Re+v0iDWGVFq8B9ksaiGEnfWFezfHHCywbJS25+GazeDI5VXH7CD8FBLs7fqT/W6D+s5HE3aWRPLe0K9go= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180508103427.w2rq3vz3f66y4cxh@vireshk-i7> References: <20180508073340.13114-1-dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> <20180508082242.bre6sjfvefhz6xc3@vireshk-i7> <8cf21b1a-ca6e-fed7-43c5-94c66ff5986b@arm.com> <20180508094526.ajyjrwytguhv4xpe@vireshk-i7> <20180508100227.GB3752@e108498-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20180508103427.w2rq3vz3f66y4cxh@vireshk-i7> From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 22:36:40 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: hTxRYeSn3SxVV60oXEgWHeQYocQ Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "cpufreq: schedutil: Don't restrict kthread to related_cpus unnecessarily" To: Viresh Kumar Cc: Quentin Perret , Dietmar Eggemann , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Linux PM , Pavan Kondeti , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Juri Lelli , Joel Fernandes , Patrick Bellasi Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 12:34 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 08-05-18, 11:02, Quentin Perret wrote: >> The sugov kthreads are DL tasks so they're not impacted by EAS. But even >> if you take EAS out of the picture, those kthreads are assigned to a >> "random" CPU at boot time and stay there forever (because that's how DL >> works). Is this what we want ? > > Okay, I didn't knew that DL threads don't migrate at all. I don't > think that's what we want then specially for big LITTLE platforms. But > for the rest, I don't know. Take example of Qcom krait. Each CPU has a > separate policy, why shouldn't we allow other CPUs to run the kthread? Because that makes things more complex and harder to debug in general. What's the exact reason why non-policy CPUs should ever run the sugov kthread for the given policy?