From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752085AbcBKSwZ (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 11 Feb 2016 13:52:25 -0500
Received: from mail-pf0-f178.google.com ([209.85.192.178]:36206 "EHLO
	mail-pf0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752022AbcBKSwW (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 11 Feb 2016 13:52:22 -0500
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] cpufreq: Replace timers with utilization update
 callbacks
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
References: <3071836.JbNxX8hU6x@vostro.rjw.lan> <56B93548.9090006@linaro.org>
 <CAJZ5v0gJwLVezLTLwGX=GDrsGeH6X040JmOaW6_uX2XzQwO9mg@mail.gmail.com>
 <5387313.xAhVpzgZCg@vostro.rjw.lan> <56BA8C29.4090905@linaro.org>
 <20160211115959.GI6357@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <56BCBF7C.2080404@linaro.org>
 <20160211173033.GP6357@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
From: Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@linaro.org>
X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110
Message-ID: <56BCD864.6030207@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 10:52:20 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20160211173033.GP6357@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 02/11/2016 09:30 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> My concern above is that pokes are guaranteed to keep occurring when
>> > there is only RT or DL activity so nothing breaks.
>
> The hook in their respective tick handler should ensure stuff is called
> sporadically and isn't stalled.

But that's only true if the RT/DL tasks happen to be running when the
tick arrives right?

Couldn't we have RT/DL activity which doesn't overlap with the tick? And
if no CFS tasks happen to be executing on that CPU, we'll never trigger
the cpufreq update. This could go on for an arbitrarily long time
depending on the periodicity of the work.