On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 10:07:06AM +0000, Juri Lelli wrote: > Argh, this makes lot of sense to me. I've actually pondered a tree/list > solution, but then decided to try the cumulative approach because it > looked nicer. But it contains holes, I'm afraid. As Luca already said, > GRUB shouldn't have these problems though. > > I'll try and see what introducting a list of blocked/throttled deadline > tasks means, considering also the interaction with cpusets and such. > Maybe it's simpler than it seems. > > I'm not sure this will come anytime soon, unfortunately. I'm almost 100% > on the sched-freq/schedutil discussion these days.
Just skip sleep and write them when its dark outside :-) > Anyway, do you also think that what we want to solve the root domain > issue is something based on rq_online/offline and per-rq information? > Everything else that I tried or thought of was broken/more horrible. :-/ I was still trying to get my head around this, the above was my suggestion to the per-rq state, but I've not thought hard on alternative approaches to the root_domain issue.
