Re: [RFC v2 1/8] sched/tune: add detailed documentation

2016-11-08 Thread Patrick Bellasi
On 04-Nov 15:16, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 27-10-16, 18:41, Patrick Bellasi wrote: > > +This last requirement is especially important if we consider that > > schedutil can > > +potentially replace all currently available CPUFreq policies. Since > > schedutil > > +is event based, as opposed to the

Re: [RFC v2 1/8] sched/tune: add detailed documentation

2016-11-04 Thread Viresh Kumar
On 27-10-16, 18:41, Patrick Bellasi wrote: > +This last requirement is especially important if we consider that schedutil > can > +potentially replace all currently available CPUFreq policies. Since schedutil > +is event based, as opposed to the sampling driven governors, it is already > more > +

[RFC v2 1/8] sched/tune: add detailed documentation

2016-10-27 Thread Patrick Bellasi
The topic of a single simple power-performance tunable, that is wholly scheduler centric, and has well defined and predictable properties has come up on several occasions in the past. With techniques such as a scheduler driven DVFS, which is now provided mainline via the schedutil governor, we now