Re: [PATCH v6 09/16] sched/cpufreq: uclamp: Add utilization clamping for RT tasks
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Date: 2019-01-23 10:49:59
Also in:
linux-pm, lkml
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Date: 2019-01-23 10:49:59
Also in:
linux-pm, lkml
On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 10:15:06AM +0000, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
@@ -858,16 +859,23 @@ static inline void uclamp_effective_get(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int clamp_id, unsigned int *clamp_value, unsigned int *bucket_id) { + struct uclamp_se *default_clamp; + /* Task specific clamp value */ *clamp_value = p->uclamp[clamp_id].value; *bucket_id = p->uclamp[clamp_id].bucket_id; + /* RT tasks have different default values */ + default_clamp = task_has_rt_policy(p) + ? uclamp_default_perf + : uclamp_default; + /* System default restriction */ - if (unlikely(*clamp_value < uclamp_default[UCLAMP_MIN].value || - *clamp_value > uclamp_default[UCLAMP_MAX].value)) { + if (unlikely(*clamp_value < default_clamp[UCLAMP_MIN].value || + *clamp_value > default_clamp[UCLAMP_MAX].value)) { /* Keep it simple: unconditionally enforce system defaults */ - *clamp_value = uclamp_default[clamp_id].value; - *bucket_id = uclamp_default[clamp_id].bucket_id; + *clamp_value = default_clamp[clamp_id].value; + *bucket_id = default_clamp[clamp_id].bucket_id; } }
So I still don't much like the whole effective thing; but I think you should use rt_task() instead of task_has_rt_policy().