linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the pm tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in:

  kernel/sched/fair.c

between commit:

  674e75411fc2 ("sched: cpufreq: Allow remote cpufreq callbacks")

from the pm tree and commit:

  a030d7381d8b ("sched/fair: Call cpufreq update util handlers less frequently on UP")

from the tip tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc kernel/sched/fair.c
index d378d02fdfcb,8d5868771cb3..000000000000
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@@ -2790,6 -2801,29 +2801,31 @@@ static inline void update_cfs_shares(st
  }
  #endif /* CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED */
  
+ static inline void cfs_rq_util_change(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
+ {
 -	if (&this_rq()->cfs == cfs_rq) {
++	struct rq *rq = rq_of(cfs_rq);
++
++	if (&rq->cfs == cfs_rq) {
+ 		/*
+ 		 * There are a few boundary cases this might miss but it should
+ 		 * get called often enough that that should (hopefully) not be
+ 		 * a real problem -- added to that it only calls on the local
+ 		 * CPU, so if we enqueue remotely we'll miss an update, but
+ 		 * the next tick/schedule should update.
+ 		 *
+ 		 * It will not get called when we go idle, because the idle
+ 		 * thread is a different class (!fair), nor will the utilization
+ 		 * number include things like RT tasks.
+ 		 *
+ 		 * As is, the util number is not freq-invariant (we'd have to
+ 		 * implement arch_scale_freq_capacity() for that).
+ 		 *
+ 		 * See cpu_util().
+ 		 */
 -		cpufreq_update_util(rq_of(cfs_rq), 0);
++		cpufreq_update_util(rq, 0);
+ 	}
+ }
+ 
  #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
  /*
   * Approximate: