From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6924C4167B for ; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 15:19:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E7ED23AA8 for ; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 15:19:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728874AbgLIPTZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Dec 2020 10:19:25 -0500 Received: from so254-31.mailgun.net ([198.61.254.31]:36265 "EHLO so254-31.mailgun.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726101AbgLIPTV (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Dec 2020 10:19:21 -0500 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; v=1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mg.codeaurora.org; q=dns/txt; s=smtp; t=1607527135; h=In-Reply-To: Content-Type: MIME-Version: References: Message-ID: Subject: Cc: To: From: Date: Sender; bh=nk2LdvOUPXoWK1/EktFM/brqUSemntfMxA6Fzq9tCOE=; b=Qn+kE6QCGXSiM8ha5fd9mIbvT749uPiZ34gFQvmmv1E4DsF3PCHnLm5H9Esvb4r9QU0aq6cx nXSCBkyM790jU2iunM5XJ2ExravQzU868jV7rABNcQbY4AVh+V5wPC6X8xesu7PvXmOQTjSx 81o1zZ3kldeSVlMjDmc/qxMKJx8= X-Mailgun-Sending-Ip: 198.61.254.31 X-Mailgun-Sid: WyI1MzIzYiIsICJsaW51eC1hcm0tbXNtQHZnZXIua2VybmVsLm9yZyIsICJiZTllNGEiXQ== Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org (ec2-35-166-182-171.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.166.182.171]) by smtp-out-n03.prod.us-west-2.postgun.com with SMTP id 5fd0eabed5b4c78a8ff87ee9 (version=TLS1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256); Wed, 09 Dec 2020 15:18:22 GMT Sender: ilina=codeaurora.org@mg.codeaurora.org Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 8E2C5C43462; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 15:18:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (i-global254.qualcomm.com [199.106.103.254]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ilina) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DA69FC433C6; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 15:18:20 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org DA69FC433C6 Authentication-Results: aws-us-west-2-caf-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: aws-us-west-2-caf-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=ilina@codeaurora.org Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 08:18:19 -0700 From: Lina Iyer To: Ulf Hansson Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux PM , linux-arm-msm Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/3] Better domain idle from device wakeup patterns Message-ID: References: <20201130225039.15981-1-ilina@codeaurora.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Dec 09 2020 at 03:37 -0700, Ulf Hansson wrote: >On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 18:26, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> >> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 11:51 PM Lina Iyer wrote: >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > The v5[1] of the series brought out some interesting discussions. The >> > most important being is it worth adding the additional expense to all PM >> > domains even if no wakeup pattern is available. It seems like >> > maintaining a domain specific flag that the governor could check is a >> > generic enough option. That should disable additional overhead for >> > domains that do not need this feature. >> > >> > Ulf suggested that we could allow wakeups only if any of the domain idle >> > state specifies a residency. However, we don't want to check for next >> > wakeup everytime the domain enters idle just because the domain >> > specifies an idle state with residency. This is also not desired. >> > >> > Also, if the domain checks for next wakeup, should the parent domains of >> > the domain also check for next wakeup? And when do we set that up? These >> > are questions that we don't know the answers yet. So, let's enable the >> > domain governor only if the domain sets up the flag or when the device >> > in the domain specifies the next wakeup. >> > >> > The previous post of the series explaining why this is a useful feature >> > is v5[1]. Please let me know what you think. >> >> Ulf had comments on the previous versions, so waiting for him to >> respond here, thanks! > >Yes, I will have a look, but please allow me some more time - it's a >busy period for me. > Thank you. -- Lina