On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 09:45:01AM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Linus, what...
>
> On 14.02.24 18:22, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 at 18:20, Linus Torvalds
> > <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 at 09:12, Jon Hunter <jonathanh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>> We have also observed a performance degradation on our Tegra platforms
> >>> with v6.8-rc1. Unfortunately, the above change does not fix the problem
> >>> for us and we are still seeing a performance issue with v6.8-rc4. For
> >>> example, running Dhrystone on Tegra234 I am seeing the following ...
> >>> [...]
> >>> If I revert this change and the following ...
> >>> b3edde44e5d4 ("cpufreq/schedutil: Use a fixed reference frequency")
> >>> f12560779f9d ("sched/cpufreq: Rework iowait boost")
> >>> 9c0b4bb7f630 ("sched/cpufreq: Rework schedutil governor
> >>> ... then the perf is similar to where it was ...
> >>
> >> Ok, guys, this whole scheduler / cpufreq rewrite seems to have been
> >> completely buggered.
> >> [...]
> > This should fix it:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240117190545.596057-1-vincent.guittot@xxxxxxxxxx/
>
> ...do you want me to do in situations like this? I'm asking, as I see
> situations like this frequently -- e.g. people reporting problems a
> second, third, or fourth time while the fix is already sitting in -next
> for a few days.
>
> Want me to list them in the weekly reports so that you can cherry-pick
> them from -next if you want?
Poke the maintainer to get off their butt and submit the pull request to
Linus (note, this is me in this case...)
I'll get it into the next -rc, sorry for the delay, other things got in
the way, my fault.
greg k-h
