On 01.09.26 08:21, Vincent Guittot wrote: > On Mon, 31 Aug 2026 at 18:54, Yury Norov <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Aug 31, 2026 at 05:09:41PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote: >> >>>> Dietmar/Vincent, >>>> Do you think it makes sense to enable the driver on ARM64 now? >>>> Or you think it is better to delay it and once the feature is stable >>>> ARM ecosystem can enable it? >>> >>> It's always better to support all arch by default, unless something is >>> missing which is not the case here. >> >> ARM64 testing is obviously missed. > > But the cpumask is already available not like if you need to create a new one
IMHO, when testing the steal_governor on arm64 w/o `allow_mismatched_32bit_el0`, I wouldn't expect much difference in this respect compared to the architectures already tested. Also, AFAIK, `allow_mismatched_32bit_el0` was mainly relevant for Android devices up to Android 13 that supported 32-bit userspace, so I wouldn't expect it to be commonly enabled on recent devices. As Vincent pointed out, `task_cpu_possible_mask(p)` (which defaults to `cpu_possible_mask`) is already used in `kernel/sched/core.c` and `kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c` to support `allow_mismatched_32bit_el0`.
