Re: default cpufreq gov, was: [PATCH] sched/fair: check for idle core

[Viresh Kumar]

On 27-10-20, 11:42, Qais Yousef wrote:
> On 10/27/20 11:26, Valentin Schneider wrote:
> > 
> > On 27/10/20 11:11, Qais Yousef wrote:
> > > On 10/22/20 14:02, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > >> However I do want to retire ondemand, conservative and also very much
> > >> intel_pstate/active mode. I also have very little sympathy for
> > >> userspace.
> > >
> > > Userspace is useful for testing and sanity checking. Not sure if people use it
> > > to measure voltage/current at each frequency to generate
> > > dynamic-power-coefficient for their platform. Lukasz, Dietmar?
> > >
> > 
> > It's valuable even just for cpufreq sanity checking - we have that test
> > that goes through increasing frequencies and asserts the work done is
> > monotonically increasing. This has been quite useful in the past to detect
> > broken bits.
> > 
> > That *should* still be totally doable with any other governor by using the
> > scaling_{min, max}_freq sysfs interface.
> 
> True. This effectively makes every governor a potential user space governor.
> 
> /me not sure to be happy or grumpy about it

Userspace governor should be kept as is, it is very effective to get
unnecessary governor code out of the path when testing basic
functioning of the hardware/driver. It is quite useful when things
don't work as expected.

-- 
viresh