On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 03:42:10PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > But when I discussed this with Vincent, he suggested that it may not be > required > at all as the scheduler (with the helped of "decayed") doesn't call into > schedutil too often, i.e. at least 1 ms. And if the CPUs are stable enough > (i.e. > no interruptions to the running task), we wouldn't reevaluate before the next > tick.
There are still the attach/detach callers to cfs_rq_util_change() that kick in for fork/exit and migration. But yes, barring those we shouldn't end up calling it at silly rates.
