Re: [PATCH 0/3] cpufreq: Replace timers with utilization update callbacks

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 1:39 AM, Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
>
> On 02/08/2016 03:06 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> Now that all review comments have been addressed in patch [3/3], I'm going to
>> put this series into linux-next.
>>
>> There already is 20+ patches on top of it in the queue including fixes for
>> bugs that have haunted us for quite some time (and that functionally depend on
>> this set) and I'd really like all that to get enough linux-next coverage, so
>> there really isn't more time to wait.
>
> Sorry for the late reply. As Juri mentioned I was OOO last week and
> really just got to look at this today.
>
> One concern I had was, given that the lone scheduler update hook is in
> CFS, is it possible for governor updates to be stalled due to RT or DL
> task activity?

I don't think they may be completely stalled, but I'd prefer Peter to
answer that as he suggested to do it this way.

Peter?