2016-08-17 17:23 GMT+08:00 Morten Rasmussen <[email protected]>: > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 04:42:36PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote: >> 2016-07-25 21:34 GMT+08:00 Morten Rasmussen <[email protected]>: >> > Add a topology flag to the sched_domain hierarchy indicating the lowest >> > domain level where the full range of cpu capacities is represented by >> > the domain members for asymmetric capacity topologies (e.g. ARM >> > big.LITTLE). >> > >> > The flag is intended to indicate that extra care should be taken when >> > placing tasks on cpus and this level spans all the different types of >> > cpus found in the system (no need to look further up the domain >> > hierarchy). This information is currently only available through >> > iterating through the capacities of all the cpus at parent levels in the >> > sched_domain hierarchy. >> > >> > SD 2 [ 0 1 2 3] SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY >> > >> > SD 1 [ 0 1] [ 2 3] !SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY >> > >> > cpu: 0 1 2 3 >> > capacity: 756 756 1024 1024 >> > >> > If the topology in the example above is duplicated to create an eight >> > cpu example with third sched_domain level on top (SD 3), this level >> > should not have the flag set (!SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY) as its two group >> > would both have all cpu capacities represented within them. >> >> I didn't find the place where set SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY to any SDs in >> this patchset, but you have testing result in cover letter, where I >> miss? > > The flag is supposed to be set by arch-specific code. I included a few > patches in v1 and v2 that set the flag for arch/arm. However, since they > are hopefully soon to be superseded by patches from Juri I dropped them > from the v3 posting and provided a pointer to branch containing this patch > set, Juri's patches, and few additional glue patches instead that > enabled the flag when necessary for arch/arm and arch/arm64.
Ah, ok, thanks for the information. :) Regards, Wanpeng Li
