Re: cpufreq governors broken with !CONFIG_SMP?

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Thursday, May 05, 2016 05:25:19 PM Steve Muckle wrote:
> On Fri, May 06, 2016 at 02:09:07AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > In turn, schedutil should probably depend on CONFIG_SMP.
> 
> In the long term I wonder if it's worth putting PELT under its own
> separate feature or just removing #ifdef CONFIG_SMP.
> 
> Aside from task migration CPU frequency updates there's also task
> creation and deletion which would apply on UP. The tunable
> infrastructure being created for scheduler-guided frequency may be of
> interest on UP also.

I agree, but I was talking short-term. :-)

We need to fix this for 4.6 (which most likely is 2 weeks away only) and
I don't think it hurts anyone if schedutil depends on CONFIG_SMP to start
with.