Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 26 Aug 2019 11:40:58 +0200 | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] sched/cpufreq: Align trace event behavior of fast switching |
| |
On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 11:10:52AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wednesday, August 7, 2019 5:33:40 PM CEST Douglas RAILLARD wrote: > > Fast switching path only emits an event for the CPU of interest, whereas the > > regular path emits an event for all the CPUs that had their frequency changed, > > i.e. all the CPUs sharing the same policy. > > > > With the current behavior, looking at cpu_frequency event for a given CPU that > > is using the fast switching path will not give the correct frequency signal. > > > > Signed-off-by: Douglas RAILLARD <douglas.raillard@arm.com> > > --- > > kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c | 7 ++++++- > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c > > index 1f82ab108bab..975ccc3de807 100644 > > --- a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c > > +++ b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c > > @@ -153,6 +153,7 @@ static void sugov_fast_switch(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy, u64 time, > > unsigned int next_freq) > > { > > struct cpufreq_policy *policy = sg_policy->policy; > > + int cpu; > > > > if (!sugov_update_next_freq(sg_policy, time, next_freq)) > > return; > > @@ -162,7 +163,11 @@ static void sugov_fast_switch(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy, u64 time, > > return; > > > > policy->cur = next_freq; > > - trace_cpu_frequency(next_freq, smp_processor_id()); > > + > > + if (trace_cpu_frequency_enabled()) { > > + for_each_cpu(cpu, policy->cpus) > > + trace_cpu_frequency(next_freq, cpu); > > + } > > } > > > > static void sugov_deferred_update(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy, u64 time, > > > > Peter, any comments here?
I was thinking this would be a static map and dealing with it would be something trivially done in post (or manually while reading), but sure, whatever:
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
| |