On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 12:46:06PM -0700, Steve Muckle wrote:
> Hi Peter, Ingo,
Hi Peter/Ingo would appreciate any thoughts you may have on the issue
below.
thanks,
Steve
>
> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 04:04:19PM -0700, Steve Muckle wrote:
> > On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:06:14PM +0200, Rafael J. Wy
Hi Peter, Ingo,
On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 04:04:19PM -0700, Steve Muckle wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:06:14PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > In the case of a remote update the hook has to run (or not) after it is
> > > known whether preemption will occur so we don't do needless work or
On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:06:14PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > In the case of a remote update the hook has to run (or not) after it is
> > known whether preemption will occur so we don't do needless work or
> > IPIs. If the policy CPUs aren't known in the scheduler then the early
> > hook w
On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 9:19 PM, Steve Muckle wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 02:00:54PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 1:33 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> > On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 11:20 PM, Steve Muckle
>> > wrote:
>> >> Without calling the cpufreq hook for a remo
On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 02:00:54PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 1:33 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 11:20 PM, Steve Muckle
> > wrote:
> >> Without calling the cpufreq hook for a remote wakeup it is possible
> >> for such a wakeup to go unnoti
On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 1:33 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 11:20 PM, Steve Muckle wrote:
>> Without calling the cpufreq hook for a remote wakeup it is possible
>> for such a wakeup to go unnoticed by cpufreq on the target CPU for up
>> to a full tick. This can occur if the
On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 11:20 PM, Steve Muckle wrote:
> Without calling the cpufreq hook for a remote wakeup it is possible
> for such a wakeup to go unnoticed by cpufreq on the target CPU for up
> to a full tick. This can occur if the target CPU is running a
> CPU-bound task and preemption does no
7 matches
Mail list logo