Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] CFS idle injection

[Peter Zijlstra]

People, trim your emails!

On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 08:58:30AM -0800, Jacob Pan wrote:

> > I also like #2 too. Specially now that it is not limited to a specific
> > platform. One question though, could you still keep the cooling device
> > support of it? In some systems, it might make sense to enable /
> > disable idle injections based on temperature.

> One of the key difference between 1 and 2 is that #2 is open loop
> control, since we don't have CPU c-states info baked into scheduler. 

_yet_, there's people working on that. The whole power aware scheduling
stuff needs that.
 
> To close the loop, perhaps we can export some internal APIs to the
> thermal subsystem then the thermal governors can pick the condition to
> inject idle.

I would much rather that all be part of the power aware stuff, such that
the scheduler itself is aware of thermal limits and can migrate load
away if needed.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/