On 06/24/20 11:29, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 10:55 AM Joel Fernandes wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 1:52 PM Qais Yousef wrote:
> > >
> > > On 06/24/20 13:35, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > > > Doing the in-kernel opt-out via API should
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 10:55 AM Joel Fernandes wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 1:52 PM Qais Yousef wrote:
> >
> > On 06/24/20 13:35, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > Doing the in-kernel opt-out via API should be fine, I think. But this
> > > > will
> > > > need to be
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 1:52 PM Qais Yousef wrote:
>
> On 06/24/20 13:35, Joel Fernandes wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > Doing the in-kernel opt-out via API should be fine, I think. But this will
> > > need to be discussed in the wider circle. It will already clash with this
> > > for
> > > example
> >
On 06/24/20 13:35, Joel Fernandes wrote:
[...]
> > Doing the in-kernel opt-out via API should be fine, I think. But this will
> > need to be discussed in the wider circle. It will already clash with this
> > for
> > example
> >
> >
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 12:55 PM Qais Yousef wrote:
>
> On 06/24/20 11:49, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 12:40 PM Qais Yousef wrote:
> > >
> > > On 06/22/20 11:21, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > > > If you propose something that will help the discussion. I
On 06/24/20 18:01, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 05:40:21PM +0100, Qais Yousef wrote:
> > On 06/22/20 11:21, Doug Anderson wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > If you propose something that will help the discussion. I think based
> > > > on the
> > > > same approach Peter has
On 06/24/20 11:49, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 12:40 PM Qais Yousef wrote:
> >
> > On 06/22/20 11:21, Doug Anderson wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > If you propose something that will help the discussion. I think based
> > > > on the
> > > > same approach Peter has taken to
On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 05:40:21PM +0100, Qais Yousef wrote:
> On 06/22/20 11:21, Doug Anderson wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > If you propose something that will help the discussion. I think based on
> > > the
> > > same approach Peter has taken to prevent random RT priorities. In uclamp
> > > case
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 02:18:23PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 5:52 AM Qais Yousef wrote:
> >
> > On 06/10/20 15:18, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> > > + struct sched_attr sched_attr = {
> > > + .sched_policy = SCHED_FIFO,
> > > +
On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 12:40 PM Qais Yousef wrote:
>
> On 06/22/20 11:21, Doug Anderson wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > If you propose something that will help the discussion. I think based on
> > > the
> > > same approach Peter has taken to prevent random RT priorities. In uclamp
> > > case
> > > I
On 06/22/20 11:21, Doug Anderson wrote:
[...]
> > If you propose something that will help the discussion. I think based on the
> > same approach Peter has taken to prevent random RT priorities. In uclamp
> > case
> > I think we just want to allow driver to opt RT tasks out of the default
> >
On 06/22/20 11:19, Doug Anderson wrote:
[...]
> > Hmm I thought OEMs who ship stuff that are based on Chrome OS would have to
> > do
> > the final tuning here, which would be based on the recommendation of the SoC
> > vendor. And I'm being overly generic here to think not only SoC from Intel
>
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 8:38 AM Qais Yousef wrote:
>
> On 06/18/20 14:18, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 5:52 AM Qais Yousef wrote:
> > >
> > > On 06/10/20 15:18, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> > > > The cros_ec_spi driver is realtime priority so that it doesn't get
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 8:31 AM Qais Yousef wrote:
>
> Hi Doug,
>
> On 06/18/20 14:31, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 5:34 AM Qais Yousef wrote:
> > >
> > > On 06/12/20 10:24, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > > > +CC Qais [FYI]
> > >
> > > Thanks for the CC.
> > >
> >
On 06/18/20 14:18, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 5:52 AM Qais Yousef wrote:
> >
> > On 06/10/20 15:18, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> > > The cros_ec_spi driver is realtime priority so that it doesn't get
> > > preempted by other taks while it's talking to the EC but overall
Hi Doug,
On 06/18/20 14:31, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 5:34 AM Qais Yousef wrote:
> >
> > On 06/12/20 10:24, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > > +CC Qais [FYI]
> >
> > Thanks for the CC.
> >
> > >
> > > On Thursday 11 Jun 2020 at 10:48:40 (-0700), Doug Anderson wrote:
> > >
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 5:34 AM Qais Yousef wrote:
>
> On 06/12/20 10:24, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > +CC Qais [FYI]
>
> Thanks for the CC.
>
> >
> > On Thursday 11 Jun 2020 at 10:48:40 (-0700), Doug Anderson wrote:
> > > Hrm. I guess my first instinct is to say that we still want this
> > >
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 5:52 AM Qais Yousef wrote:
>
> On 06/10/20 15:18, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> > The cros_ec_spi driver is realtime priority so that it doesn't get
> > preempted by other taks while it's talking to the EC but overall it
> > really doesn't need lots of compute power.
On 06/12/20 14:47, Quentin Perret wrote:
[...]
> > > > somehow measure whether or not the task is making its deadlines and
> > > > boost the CPU frequency up if deadlines are not being met. I'm sure
> > > > there are fancier ways.
> >
> > You need to use SCHED_DEADLINE then :)
>
> Well, not
On Friday 12 Jun 2020 at 13:34:48 (+0100), Qais Yousef wrote:
> > On Thursday 11 Jun 2020 at 10:48:40 (-0700), Doug Anderson wrote:
> > > I'm not totally a fan, but I'm definitely not an expert in this area
> > > (I've also only read the patch description and not the patch or the
> > > whole
On 06/10/20 15:18, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> The cros_ec_spi driver is realtime priority so that it doesn't get
> preempted by other taks while it's talking to the EC but overall it
> really doesn't need lots of compute power. Unfortunately, by default,
> the kernel assumes that all realtime
On 06/12/20 10:24, Quentin Perret wrote:
> +CC Qais [FYI]
Thanks for the CC.
>
> On Thursday 11 Jun 2020 at 10:48:40 (-0700), Doug Anderson wrote:
> > Hrm. I guess my first instinct is to say that we still want this
> > patch even if we have something that is applied more globally.
>
> Fair
+CC Qais [FYI]
On Thursday 11 Jun 2020 at 10:48:40 (-0700), Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hrm. I guess my first instinct is to say that we still want this
> patch even if we have something that is applied more globally.
Fair enough.
> Specifically it sounds as if the patch you point at is suggesting
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 4:03 AM Quentin Perret wrote:
>
> Hi Doug,
>
> On Wednesday 10 Jun 2020 at 15:18:43 (-0700), Douglas Anderson wrote:
> > The cros_ec_spi driver is realtime priority so that it doesn't get
> > preempted by other taks while it's talking to the EC but overall it
> >
Hi Doug,
On Wednesday 10 Jun 2020 at 15:18:43 (-0700), Douglas Anderson wrote:
> The cros_ec_spi driver is realtime priority so that it doesn't get
> preempted by other taks while it's talking to the EC but overall it
> really doesn't need lots of compute power. Unfortunately, by default,
> the
The cros_ec_spi driver is realtime priority so that it doesn't get
preempted by other taks while it's talking to the EC but overall it
really doesn't need lots of compute power. Unfortunately, by default,
the kernel assumes that all realtime tasks should cause the cpufreq to
jump to max and burn
26 matches
Mail list logo
