75fdd658cb
If we failed to find a fitting CPU, in cpupri_find(), we only fallback
to the level we found a hit at.
But Steve suggested to fallback to a second full scan instead as this
could be a better effort.
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200304135404.146c56eb@gandalf.local.home/
We trigger the 2nd search unconditionally since the argument about
triggering a full search is that the recorded fall back level might have
become empty by then. Which means storing any data about what happened
would be meaningless and stale.
I had a humble try at timing it and it seemed okay for the small 6 CPUs
system I was running on
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200305124324.42x6ehjxbnjkklnh@e107158-lin.cambridge.arm.com/
On large system this second full scan could be expensive. But there are
no users outside capacity awareness for this fitness function at the
moment. Heterogeneous systems tend to be small with 8cores in total.
Bug: 120440300
Suggested-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Signed-off-by: Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200310142219.syxzn5ljpdxqtbgx@e107158-lin.cambridge.arm.com
(cherry picked from commit e94f80f6c4)
Signed-off-by: Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com>
Change-Id: I94a3abf1440f20f57d8fe9ba1bb00e1d05221565