From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Antti P Miettinen Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] RFC: CPU frequency min/max as PM QoS params Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 11:54:47 +0200 Message-ID: <87mx9mr6vs.fsf@amiettinen-lnx.nvidia.com> References: <1326697201-32406-1-git-send-email-amiettinen@nvidia.com> <201201162238.57556.rjw@sisk.pl> <87r4yyrh2e.fsf@amiettinen-lnx.nvidia.com> <810586B7581CC8469141DADEBC37191204112D@BGSMSX102.gar.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org Cc: cpufreq@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org "Mansoor, Illyas" writes: > How about a notion of platform agnostic freq metric that can then me > normalized to The platform available freq's like for example a value > 100 that denotes top freq, that Way PM QoS can then ajust the > application requested number to platform available Freq. That will not necessarily help the PM QoS client in choosing the appropriate performance level. On one platform the appropriate level for a given situation might be 5% of max, on another 75%. I think the hairy issue is that there are so many application oriented performance metrics (MIPS, FLOPS, FPS, milliseconds..). --Antti