From: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: Rafael Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@arm.com>,
lukasz.luba@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 13:35:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YRJym+Vn4bbwQzzs@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1628579170.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
On Tuesday 10 Aug 2021 at 13:06:47 (+0530), Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Provide a cpufreq driver flag so drivers can ask the cpufreq core to register
> with the EM core on their behalf.
Hmm, that's not quite what this does. This asks the cpufreq core to
use *PM_OPP* to register an EM, which I think is kinda wrong to do from
there IMO. The decision to use PM_OPP or another mechanism to register
an EM belongs to platform specific code (drivers), so it is odd for the
PM_OPP registration to have its own cpufreq flag but not the other ways.
As mentioned in another thread, the very reason to have PM_EM is to not
depend on PM_OPP, so I'm worried about the direction of travel with this
series TBH.
> This allows us to get rid of duplicated code
> in the drivers and fix the unregistration part as well, which none of the
> drivers have done until now.
This series adds more code than it removes, and the unregistration is
not a fix as we don't ever remove the EM tables by design, so not sure
either of these points are valid arguments.
> This would also make the registration with EM core to happen only after policy
> is fully initialized, and the EM core can do other stuff from in there, like
> marking frequencies as inefficient (WIP). Though this patchset is useful without
> that work being done and should be merged nevertheless.
>
> This doesn't update scmi cpufreq driver for now as it is a special case and need
> to be handled differently. Though we can make it work with this if required.
Note that we'll have more 'special cases' if other architectures start
using PM_EM, which is what we have been trying to allow since the
beginning, so that's worth keeping in mind.
Thanks,
Quentin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-10 12:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ 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 ` [PATCH 6/8] cpufreq: qcom-cpufreq-hw: Use auto-registration for " Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 10:26 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 9:17 ` [PATCH 0/8] cpufreq: Auto-register with " Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 9:27 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-10 9:35 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 12:35 ` Quentin Perret [this message]
2021-08-10 13:25 ` Lukasz Luba
2021-08-10 13:53 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-11 5:18 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-11 5:34 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-11 9:48 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-11 9:53 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-11 10:12 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-11 10:14 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-11 8:37 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-11 9:13 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-08-11 9:34 ` Quentin Perret
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=YRJym+Vn4bbwQzzs@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).