On 09-May 13:53, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 10:10:57AM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> > On 08-May 21:15, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 09:07:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 11:41:40AM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> > > >
On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 10:10:57AM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> On 08-May 21:15, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 09:07:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 11:41:40AM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> > > > +static inline struct uclamp_se
> > > > +uclam
On 08-May 21:15, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 09:07:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 11:41:40AM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> > > +static inline struct uclamp_se
> > > +uclamp_eff_get(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int clamp_id)
> > > +{
> > > + st
On 08-May 20:42, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 11:41:40AM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> > Add a privileged interface to define a system default configuration via:
> >
> > /proc/sys/kernel/sched_uclamp_util_{min,max}
>
> Isn't the 'u' in "uclamp" already for util?
Yes, right
On 08-May 21:00, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> There was a bunch of repetition that seemed fragile; does something like
> the below make sense?
Absolutely yes... will add to v9, thanks.
> Index: linux-2.6/kernel/sched/core.c
> ===
> --
On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 11:41:40AM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> +static inline struct uclamp_se
> +uclamp_eff_get(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int clamp_id)
> +{
> + struct uclamp_se uc_req = p->uclamp_req[clamp_id];
> + struct uclamp_se uc_max = uclamp_default[clamp_id];
> +
> +
On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 09:07:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 11:41:40AM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> > +static inline struct uclamp_se
> > +uclamp_eff_get(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int clamp_id)
> > +{
> > + struct uclamp_se uc_req = p->uclamp_req[clamp_id];
There was a bunch of repetition that seemed fragile; does something like
the below make sense?
Index: linux-2.6/kernel/sched/core.c
===
--- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ linux-2.6/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -770,6 +770,9 @@ un
On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 11:41:40AM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> Add a privileged interface to define a system default configuration via:
>
> /proc/sys/kernel/sched_uclamp_util_{min,max}
Isn't the 'u' in "uclamp" already for util?
On 17-Apr 17:51, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 3:42 AM Patrick Bellasi
> wrote:
[...]
> > +/*
> > + * The effective clamp bucket index of a task depends on, by increasing
> > + * priority:
> > + * - the task specific clamp value, when explicitly requested from
> > userspac
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 3:42 AM Patrick Bellasi wrote:
>
> Tasks without a user-defined clamp value are considered not clamped
> and by default their utilization can have any value in the
> [0..SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE] range.
>
> Tasks with a user-defined clamp value are allowed to request any value
>
Tasks without a user-defined clamp value are considered not clamped
and by default their utilization can have any value in the
[0..SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE] range.
Tasks with a user-defined clamp value are allowed to request any value
in that range, and the required clamp is unconditionally enforced.
12 matches
Mail list logo
