Re: [PATCH 1/7] sched/core: uclamp: add CPU clamp groups accounting

[Patrick Bellasi]

On 13-Apr 12:22, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 10:26:48AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 05:56:09PM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> > > +static inline void uclamp_cpu_get(struct task_struct *p, int cpu, int clamp_id)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct uclamp_cpu *uc_cpu = &cpu_rq(cpu)->uclamp[clamp_id];
> > 
> > > +static inline void uclamp_cpu_put(struct task_struct *p, int cpu, int clamp_id)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct uclamp_cpu *uc_cpu = &cpu_rq(cpu)->uclamp[clamp_id];
> > 
> > That all seems daft, since you already have rq at the call site.
> > 
> > > +static inline void uclamp_task_update(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
> > > +{
> > > +	int cpu = cpu_of(rq);
> > > +	int clamp_id;
> > > +
> > > +	/* The idle task does not affect CPU's clamps */
> > > +	if (unlikely(p->sched_class == &idle_sched_class))
> > > +		return;
> > > +	/* DEADLINE tasks do not affect CPU's clamps */
> > > +	if (unlikely(p->sched_class == &dl_sched_class))
> > > +		return;
> > 
> > This is wrong; it misses the stop_sched_class.
> > 
> > And since you're looking at sched_class anyway, maybe put a marker in
> > there:
> > 
> > 	if (!p->sched_class->has_clamping)
> > 		return;
> 
> Alternatively, we could simply add uclamp_task_{en,de}queue() into
> {en,de}queue_task_{fair,rt}().

I like better your first proposal, I think it makes sense to factor
out in core code used by both RT and FAIR the same way.

Do you have a strong preference?

> > > +	for (clamp_id = 0; clamp_id < UCLAMP_CNT; ++clamp_id) {
> > > +		if (uclamp_task_affects(p, clamp_id))
> > > +			uclamp_cpu_put(p, cpu, clamp_id);
> > > +		else
> > > +			uclamp_cpu_get(p, cpu, clamp_id);
> > > +	}
> > > +}

-- 
#include <best/regards.h>

Patrick Bellasi