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

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 09:06:04AM -0800, Steve Muckle wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> 
> >> > I think additional hooks such as enqueue/dequeue would be needed in
> >> > RT/DL.

That is what I reacted to mostly. Enqueue/dequeue hooks don't really
make much sense for RT / DL.

> Rafael's changes aren't specifying particular frequencies/capacities in
> the scheduler hooks. They're just pokes to get cpufreq to run, in order
> to eliminate cpufreq's timers.
> 
> My concern above is that pokes are guaranteed to keep occurring when
> there is only RT or DL activity so nothing breaks.

The hook in their respective tick handler should ensure stuff is called
sporadically and isn't stalled.