The energy aware schedutil patches remimded me this was still pending.
On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 10:47:25AM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote: > Hi Peter, Vincent, > is there anything different I can do on this? I think both Vincent and me are basically fine with the patch, it was the Changelog/explanation for it that sat uneasy. Specifically I think the 'confusion' around the PELT invariance stuff doesn't help. I think that if you present it simply as making util_est directly follow upward motion and only decay on downward -- and the rationale for it -- then it should be fine.
