"Pandruvada, Srinivas" <srinivas.pandruvada@intel.com> writes:

> On Tue, 2020-03-10 at 14:41 -0700, Francisco Jerez wrote:
>> 
>
> [...]
>
>> Thanks in advance for any review feed-back and test reports.
>> 
>> [PATCH 01/10] PM: QoS: Add CPU_RESPONSE_FREQUENCY global PM QoS
>> limit.
>> [PATCH 02/10] drm/i915: Adjust PM QoS response frequency based on GPU
>> load.
>> [PATCH 03/10] OPTIONAL: drm/i915: Expose PM QoS control parameters
>> via debugfs.
>> [PATCH 04/10] Revert "cpufreq: intel_pstate: Drop ->update_util from
>> pstate_funcs"
>> [PATCH 05/10] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Implement VLP controller
>> statistics and status calculation.
>> [PATCH 06/10] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Implement VLP controller target
>> P-state range estimation.
>> [PATCH 07/10] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Implement VLP controller for HWP
>> parts.
>> [PATCH 08/10] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Enable VLP controller based on
>> ACPI FADT profile and CPUID.
>> [PATCH 09/10] OPTIONAL: cpufreq: intel_pstate: Add tracing of VLP
>> controller status.
>> [PATCH 10/10] OPTIONAL: cpufreq: intel_pstate: Expose VLP controller
>> parameters via debugfs.
>> 
> Do you have debug patch (You don't to submit as a patch), which will
> allow me to dynamically disable/enable all these changes? I want to
> compare and do some measurements.
>

Something like this (fully untested) patch?  It should prevent the VLP
controller from running if you do:

echo 16 > /sys/kernel/debug/pstate_snb/lp_debug

> Thanks,
> Srinivas 
>
>>[...]