Re: [RFC 6/6] ARM: sched: clear SD_SHARE_POWERLINE

[Santosh Shilimkar]

On Monday 29 October 2012 06:58 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On 24 October 2012 17:21, Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Sunday 07 October 2012 01:13 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > The ARM platforms take advantage of packing small tasks on few cores.
> > > This is true even when the cores of a cluster can't be powergated
> > > independently.
> > >
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >    arch/arm/kernel/topology.c |    5 +++++
> > >    1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/topology.c b/arch/arm/kernel/topology.c
> > > index 26c12c6..00511d0 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm/kernel/topology.c
> > > +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/topology.c
> > > @@ -226,6 +226,11 @@ static inline void update_cpu_power(unsigned int
> > > cpuid, unsigned int mpidr) {}
> > >     */
> > >    struct cputopo_arm cpu_topology[NR_CPUS];
> > >
> > > +int arch_sd_share_power_line(void)
> > > +{
> > > +       return 0*SD_SHARE_POWERLINE;
> > > +}
> >
> >
> > Making this selection of policy based on sched domain will better. Just
> > gives the flexibility to choose a separate scheme for big and little
> > systems which will be very convenient.
>
> I agree that it would be more flexible to be able to set it for each level
Will you be addressing that in next version then ?

Regards
santosh

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/