Re: [PATCH 2/3] sched: idle: Add sched balance option

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 12:09:20PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> I agree a numerical value is not flexible. But it sounds weird to put a
> scheduler option in the sysfs and maybe more options will follow.
> 
> I am wondering if we shouldn't create a new cgroup for 'energy' and put
> everything in there. So we will have more flexibility for extension and we
> will be able to create a group of tasks for performance and a group of tasks
> for energy saving.
> 
> Does it make sense ?

The old knobs used to live here:

-What:          /sys/devices/system/cpu/sched_mc_power_savings
-               /sys/devices/system/cpu/sched_smt_power_savings

Not entirely sure that's a fine place, but it has precedent.
--
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/