On 22-Dec 13:10, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 12:46:18PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Blergh that'd make a mess of things again.
>
> Something like so then..
>
> --- a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> @@ -187,11 +187,16 @@ static void sugov_get_util(struct sugov_
>
> static unsigned long sugov_aggregate_util(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu)
> {
> - unsigned long util = sg_cpu->util_cfs + sg_cpu->util_dl;
> struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(sg_cpu->cpu);
> + unsigned long util;
>
> - if (rq->rt.rt_nr_running)
> + if (rq->rt.rt_nr_running) {
> util = sg_cpu->max;
> + } else {
> + util = sg_cpu->util_dl;
> + if (rq->cfs.h_nr_running)
> + util += sg_cpu->util_cfs;
Since sugov_aggregate_util always follow sugov_get_util, maybe we
can move these checks into the latter and remove the first one?
That way, sg_cpu->util_{dl,rt,cfs} will always report exactly the
requests of each class considering also which tasks are RUNNABLE at
sugov_get_util time.
Still the observation of Juri is valid: do we wanna really disregard
all the CFS blocked load as soon as there are not CFS tasks?
> + }
>
> /*
> * Ideally we would like to set util_dl as min/guaranteed freq and
--
#include <best/regards.h>
Patrick Bellasi
