On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 8:42 AM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The schedutil driver sets sg_policy->next_freq to UINT_MAX on certain > occasions: > - In sugov_start(), when the schedutil governor is started for a group > of CPUs. > - And whenever we need to force a freq update before rate-limit > duration, which happens when: > - there is an update in cpufreq policy limits. > - Or when the utilization of DL scheduling class increases. > > In return, get_next_freq() doesn't return a cached next_freq value but > instead recalculates the next frequency. This has some side effects > though and may significantly delay a required increase in frequency. > > In sugov_update_single() we try to avoid decreasing frequency if the CPU > has not been idle recently. Consider this scenario, the available range > of frequencies for a CPU are from 800 MHz to 2.5 GHz and current > frequency is 800 MHz. From one of the call paths > sg_policy->need_freq_update is set to true and hence > sg_policy->next_freq is set to UINT_MAX. Now if the CPU had been busy, > next_f will always be less than UINT_MAX, whatever the value of next_f > is. And so even when we wanted to increase the frequency, we will > overwrite next_f with UINT_MAX and will not change the frequency > eventually. This will continue until the time CPU stays busy. This isn't > cross checked with any specific test cases, but rather based on general > code review. > > Fix that by not resetting the sg_policy->need_freq_update flag from > sugov_should_update_freq() but get_next_freq() and we wouldn't need to > overwrite sg_policy->next_freq anymore. > > Cc: 4.12+ <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # 4.12+ > Fixes: b7eaf1aab9f8 ("cpufreq: schedutil: Avoid reducing frequency of busy CPUs prematurely") The rest of the chantelog is totally disconnected from this commit. So the problem is that sugov_update_single() doesn't check the special UNIT_MAX value before assigning sg_policy->next_freq to next_f. Fair enough. I don't see why the patch is the right fix for that, however. Thanks, Rafael