Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1348798

Re: [PATCH 1/6] cpufreq: Reduce cpufreq_update_util() overhead a bit

From Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [PATCH 1/6] cpufreq: Reduce cpufreq_update_util() overhead a bit
Date 2016-03-03 06:50 +0100
Message-ID <r8uj8-2tq-11@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <r84I2-18B-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <r84I3-18B-49@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On 02-03-16, 03:04, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> 
> Use the observation that cpufreq_update_util() is only called
> by the scheduler with rq->lock held, so the callers of
> cpufreq_set_update_util_data() can use synchronize_sched()
> instead of synchronize_rcu() to wait for cpufreq_update_util()
> to complete.  Moreover, if they are updated to do that,
> rcu_read_(un)lock() calls in cpufreq_update_util() might be
> replaced with rcu_read_(un)lock_sched(), respectively, but
> those aren't really necessary, because the scheduler calls
> that function from RCU-sched read-side critical sections
> already.
> 
> In addition to that, if cpufreq_set_update_util_data() checks
> the func field in the struct update_util_data before setting
> the per-CPU pointer to it, the data->func check may be dropped
> from cpufreq_update_util() as well.
> 
> Make the above changes to reduce the overhead from
> cpufreq_update_util() in the scheduler paths invoking it
> and to make the cleanup after removing its callbacks less
> heavy-weight somewhat.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> ---
> 
> Supersedes https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8443191/

Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>

-- 
viresh

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

[PATCH 1/6] cpufreq: Reduce cpufreq_update_util() overhead a bit "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> - 2016-03-02 03:30 +0100
  Re: [PATCH 1/6] cpufreq: Reduce cpufreq_update_util() overhead a bit Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> - 2016-03-03 06:50 +0100
  Re: [PATCH 1/6] cpufreq: Reduce cpufreq_update_util() overhead a bit Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com> - 2016-03-03 12:50 +0100
    Re: [PATCH 1/6] cpufreq: Reduce cpufreq_update_util() overhead a bit Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-03-03 14:10 +0100

csiph-web