From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jean Pihet Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing, perf: add more power related events Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 23:43:55 +0200 Message-ID: References: <201009222049.18154.rjw@sisk.pl> <201009282322.16291.rjw@sisk.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <201009282322.16291.rjw@sisk.pl> 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: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Len Brown , linux-trace-users@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, Ingo Molnar , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, Arjan van de Ven , arjan@infradead.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 11:22 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Tuesday, September 28, 2010, Jean Pihet wrote: >> Hi, > > Hi, > >> Here is what I am proposing, in reply to all your comments: >> >> 1) rename the events to match Thomas's proposal: >> =A0 =A0power:power_cpu_cstate >> =A0 =A0power:power_cpu_pstate >> =A0 =A0power:power_cpu_sstate > > If that sstate thing is going to mean "suspend", then please drop it. > "Suspend" is not a state, let alone a CPU state. =A0It is a procedure by = which > the (entire) system is put into a sleep state (that is not confined to CP= Us). Since suspend is tied to the power management of the system, is it ok to rename it to e.g. power:system_suspend? > >> =A0 =A0... >> >> 2) introduce a new Kconfig option CONFIG_DEPRECATED_POWER_EVENTS and >> conditionally map a subset of the new events to the old ones for >> backward compatibility with the existing user apps. The apps should be >> converted to the new API asap, >> >> 3) update documentation > > Sounds reasonable. OK > >> Other remarks here below: >> >> On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 8:49 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> ... >> > This POWER_SSTATE thing seems to be totally artificial and omap-specif= ic. >> > >> > Why do you want it to be done this way? >> > >> > Or is the ACPI handling added in the ACPI patch? =A0In which case, why= don't you >> > put that power_switch_state(POWER_SSTATE, 1, 0, cpu) into >> > kernel/power/suspend.c:suspend_enter() (and analogously for >> > power_switch_state(POWER_SSTATE, 0, 0, cpu)). >> The ACPI code is not using the SSTATE event. >> Indeed inserting a tracepoint at >> kernel/power/suspend.c:suspend_enter() is more generic. I will correct >> this. > > OK > >> > Moreover, why is the cpu argument necessary for POWER_SSTATE at all? >> The cpu_id parameter is present in all events prototypes. This is not >> needed. I will correct this. > > OK > > Thanks, > Rafael > Thanks, Jean