On 05/11/15 10:12, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > People, trim your emails! > > On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 08:58:30AM -0800, Jacob Pan wrote: > >>> I also like #2 too. Specially now that it is not limited to a specific >>> platform. One question though, could you still keep the cooling device >>> support of it? In some systems, it might make sense to enable / >>> disable idle injections based on temperature. > >> One of the key difference between 1 and 2 is that #2 is open loop >> control, since we don't have CPU c-states info baked into scheduler. > > _yet_, there's people working on that. The whole power aware scheduling > stuff needs that.
Isn't the idle state information (rq->idle_state) already used in find_idlest_cpu()? What we use in energy aware scheduling is quite similar but since we're interested in the index information of the c-state (to access the right element of the idle_state vectors of the energy model, we added rq->idle_state_idx. [...] -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
