From: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
To: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
Rafael Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@arm.com>,
Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@kernel.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@nxp.com>,
Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] cpufreq: Auto-register with energy model
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2021 14:53:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YRKEztjdIFU1J5/9@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <af06b333-3d8a-807c-9ccb-d491d6a54930@arm.com>
On Tuesday 10 Aug 2021 at 14:25:15 (+0100), Lukasz Luba wrote:
> The way I see this is that the flag in cpufreq avoids
> mistakes potentially made by driver developer. It will automaticaly
> register the *simple* EM model via dev_pm_opp_of_register_em() on behalf
> of drivers (which is already done manually by drivers). The developer
> would just set the flag similarly to CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV and be sure
> it will register at the right time. Well tested flag approach should be
> safer, easier to understand, maintain.
I would agree with all that if calling dev_pm_opp_of_register_em() was
complicated, but that is not really the case. I don't think we ever call
PM_OPP directly from cpufreq core ATM, which makes a lot of sense if you
consider PM_OPP arch-specific. I could understand that we might accept a
little 'violation' of the abstraction with this series if there were
real benefits, but I just don't see them.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
To: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
Rafael Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@arm.com>,
Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@kernel.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@nxp.com>,
Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] cpufreq: Auto-register with energy model
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2021 14:53:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YRKEztjdIFU1J5/9@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <af06b333-3d8a-807c-9ccb-d491d6a54930@arm.com>
On Tuesday 10 Aug 2021 at 14:25:15 (+0100), Lukasz Luba wrote:
> The way I see this is that the flag in cpufreq avoids
> mistakes potentially made by driver developer. It will automaticaly
> register the *simple* EM model via dev_pm_opp_of_register_em() on behalf
> of drivers (which is already done manually by drivers). The developer
> would just set the flag similarly to CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV and be sure
> it will register at the right time. Well tested flag approach should be
> safer, easier to understand, maintain.
I would agree with all that if calling dev_pm_opp_of_register_em() was
complicated, but that is not really the case. I don't think we ever call
PM_OPP directly from cpufreq core ATM, which makes a lot of sense if you
consider PM_OPP arch-specific. I could understand that we might accept a
little 'violation' of the abstraction with this series if there were
real benefits, but I just don't see them.
_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
To: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
Rafael Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@arm.com>,
Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@kernel.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@nxp.com>,
Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] cpufreq: Auto-register with energy model
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2021 14:53:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YRKEztjdIFU1J5/9@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <af06b333-3d8a-807c-9ccb-d491d6a54930@arm.com>
On Tuesday 10 Aug 2021 at 14:25:15 (+0100), Lukasz Luba wrote:
> The way I see this is that the flag in cpufreq avoids
> mistakes potentially made by driver developer. It will automaticaly
> register the *simple* EM model via dev_pm_opp_of_register_em() on behalf
> of drivers (which is already done manually by drivers). The developer
> would just set the flag similarly to CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV and be sure
> it will register at the right time. Well tested flag approach should be
> safer, easier to understand, maintain.
I would agree with all that if calling dev_pm_opp_of_register_em() was
complicated, but that is not really the case. I don't think we ever call
PM_OPP directly from cpufreq core ATM, which makes a lot of sense if you
consider PM_OPP arch-specific. I could understand that we might accept a
little 'violation' of the abstraction with this series if there were
real benefits, but I just don't see them.
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-10 13:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 91+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-08-10 7:36 [PATCH 0/8] cpufreq: Auto-register with energy model Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 7:36 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 7:36 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 7:36 ` [PATCH 1/8] cpufreq: Auto-register with energy model if asked Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 9:36 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 9:38 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 15:33 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 7:36 ` [PATCH 2/8] cpufreq: dt: Use auto-registration for energy model Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 10:19 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 7:36 ` [PATCH 3/8] cpufreq: imx6q: " Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 7:36 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 10:20 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 10:20 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 7:36 ` [PATCH 4/8] cpufreq: mediatek: " Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 7:36 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 7:36 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 10:20 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 10:20 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 10:20 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 7:36 ` [PATCH 5/8] cpufreq: omap: " Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 10:24 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 7:36 ` [PATCH 6/8] cpufreq: qcom-cpufreq-hw: " Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 10:26 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 7:36 ` [PATCH 7/8] cpufreq: scpi: " Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 7:36 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 10:27 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 10:27 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-11 2:40 ` Sudeep Holla
2021-08-11 2:40 ` Sudeep Holla
2021-08-10 7:36 ` [PATCH 8/8] cpufreq: vexpress: " Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 7:36 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 10:05 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 10:05 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 10:06 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 10:06 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 10:11 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 10:11 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 10:12 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 10:12 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 10:30 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 10:30 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-11 2:40 ` Sudeep Holla
2021-08-11 2:40 ` Sudeep Holla
2021-08-10 9:17 ` [PATCH 0/8] cpufreq: Auto-register with " Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 9:17 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 9:17 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 9:27 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 9:27 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 9:27 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 9:35 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 9:35 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 9:35 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 12:35 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-10 12:35 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-10 12:35 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-10 13:25 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 13:25 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 13:25 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 13:53 ` Quentin Perret [this message]
2021-08-10 13:53 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-10 13:53 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-11 5:18 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-11 5:18 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-11 5:18 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-11 5:34 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-11 5:34 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-11 5:34 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-11 9:48 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-11 9:48 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-11 9:48 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-11 9:53 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-11 9:53 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-11 9:53 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-11 10:12 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-11 10:12 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-11 10:12 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-11 10:14 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-11 10:14 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-11 10:14 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-11 8:37 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-11 8:37 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-11 8:37 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-11 9:13 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-11 9:13 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-11 9:13 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-11 9:34 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-11 9:34 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-11 9:34 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-11 9:36 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-11 9:36 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-11 9:36 ` Viresh Kumar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YRKEztjdIFU1J5/9@google.com \
--to=qperret@google.com \
--cc=agross@kernel.org \
--cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
--cc=cristian.marussi@arm.com \
--cc=festevam@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=khilman@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-imx@nxp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukasz.luba@arm.com \
--cc=matthias.bgg@gmail.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
--cc=shawnguo@kernel.org \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=vincent.donnefort@arm.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.