On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 04:58:01PM +0100, Qais Yousef wrote: > On 05/28/20 15:23, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > So afaict this is directly added to the enqueue/dequeue path, and we've > > recently already had complaints that uclamp is too slow. > > I wanted to keep this function simpler. Right; I appreciate that, but as always it's a balance between simple and performance :-) > > Is there really no other way? > > There is my first attempt which performs the sync @ task_woken_rt(). > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191220164838.31619-1-qais.yousef@xxxxxxx/ > > I can revert the sync function to the simpler version defined in that patch > too. > > I can potentially move this to uclamp_eff_value() too. Will need to think more > if this is enough. If task_woken_rt() is good for you, I'd say that's more > obviously correct and better to go with it. task_woken_rt() is better, because that only slows down RT tasks, but I'm thinking we can do even better by simply setting the default such that new tasks pick it up and then (rcu) iterating all existing tasks and modiying them. It's more code, but it is all outside of the normal paths where we care about performance. > FWIW, I think you're referring to Mel's notice in OSPM regarding the overhead. > Trying to see what goes on in there. Indeed, that one. The fact that regular distros cannot enable this feature due to performance overhead is unfortunate. It means there is a lot less potential for this stuff.
