On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 09:47:12AM -0800, Joel Fernandes wrote: > Since the recent remote cpufreq callback work, its possible that a cpufreq > update is triggered from a remote CPU. For single policies however, the > current > code uses the local CPU when trying to determine if the remote sg_cpu entered > idle or is busy. This is incorrect. To remedy this, compare with the nohz tick > idle_calls counter of the remote CPU. > > Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.ku...@linaro.org> > Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes <joe...@google.com>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <pet...@infradead.org> > --- > Just resending this which is cpufreq-related as requested by Rafael rebased > on linus/master. > > The other 2 patches in my last series which can go in independent of this one > are: > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10115395/ > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10115401/ > I'm still waiting on scheduler maintainers to comment on those. Unfortunately, > I haven't heard back anything yet since the last repost of those. Both of us have been somewhat preoccupied with that whole kaiser/pti thing the past few weeks. I have an absolutely stupid backlog :/
