* Jacob Pan <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 09:36:22 +0100
> Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > This patch introduces a scheduler based idle injection method, it
> > > works by blocking CFS runqueue synchronously and periodically. The
> > > actions on all online CPUs are orchestrated by per CPU hrtimers.
> > >
> > > Two sysctl knobs are given to the userspace for selecting the
> > > percentage of idle time as well as the forced idle duration for each
> > > idle period injected.
> >
> > What's the purpose of these knobs? Just testing, or will some
> > user-space daemon set them dynamically?
> >
> yes, it is to be used by userspace daemon such as thermal daemon.
> Though there are interests from in kernel thermal governor but that is
> another story.
Yeah, so let me make this very clear: for a kernel scheduling feature to be
self-sufficient is not 'another story', but a must-have aspect for this feature
to become upstream acceptable.
We don't add scheduler features that rely on pushing 'policy' to user-space.
That's poor design with many disadvantages. This feature should offer a
reasonable
and automatic in-kernel default behavior with numbers that prove that it works.
Keeping an essential part of the feature in user-space earns a NAK from me.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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/
