Linux-PM Archive on
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Sibi Sankar <>
To: Saravana Kannan <>,
	Georgi Djakov <>
Cc: Rob Herring <>,
	Mark Rutland <>,
	Viresh Kumar <>, Nishanth Menon <>,
	Stephen Boyd <>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <>,
	MyungJoo Ham <>,
	Kyungmin Park <>,
	Chanwoo Choi <>,
	Rajendra Nayak <>,
	Jordan Crouse <>,
	Vincent Guittot <>,
	Bjorn Andersson <>,,,,,
	Android Kernel Team <>,,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 11/11] interconnect: Add devfreq support
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 23:42:58 +0530
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

Hey Saravana,

On 6/18/19 2:48 AM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 8:44 AM Georgi Djakov <> wrote:
>> Hi Saravana,
>> On 6/14/19 07:17, Saravana Kannan wrote:
>>> Add a icc_create_devfreq() and icc_remove_devfreq() to create and remove
>>> devfreq devices for interconnect paths. A driver can create/remove devfreq
>>> devices for the interconnects needed for its device by calling these APIs.
>>> This would allow various devfreq governors to work with interconnect paths
>>> and the device driver itself doesn't have to actively manage the bandwidth
>>> votes for the interconnects.
>> Thanks for the patches, but creating devfreq devices for each interconnect path
>> seems odd to me - at least for consumers that already use a governor.
> Each governor instance always handles one "frequency" (more like
> performance) domain at a time. So if a consumer is already using a
> governor to scale the hardware block, then using another governor to
> scale the interconnect performance points is the right way to go about
> it. In fact, that's exactly what devfreq passive governor's
> documentation even says it's meant for. That's also what cpufreq does
> for each cluster/CPU frequency domain too.
>> So for DDR
>> scaling for example, are you suggesting that we add a devfreq device from the
>> cpufreq driver in order to scale the interconnect between CPU<->DDR?
> Yes in general. Although, CPUs are a special case because CPUs don't
> go through devfreq. So passive governor as it stands today won't work.
> CPU<->DDR scaling might need a separate governor (unlikely) or some
> changes to the passive governor that I'm happy to work on once we
> settle this for general devices like GPU, etc. But the DT format for
> CPUs will be identical to GPUs or any other device.

using icc_create_devfreq from the cpufreq-hw driver on SDM845 SoC
to scale CPU<->DDR would cause a circular dependency. (i.e) with
the addition of cpufreq notifier to the passive governor as in devm_devfreq_add_device
would require the cpufreq transistion notifier register and cpu
freq_cpu_get to go through. Please add your thought on addressing this.

>> Also if the
>> GPU is already using devfreq, should we add a devfreq per each interconnect
>> path? What would be the benefit in this case - using different governors for
>> bandwidth scaling maybe?
> When saying "separate/different governors" in this email, I mean both
> different instance of the same governor logic with different tunables
> AND actually different algorithms/governor logic entirely.
> The heuristics to use for each interconnect path might be (more like,
> will be) different based on hardware characteristics (Eg: what voltage
> domains the interconnect is sitting on) and what interconnect
> information is available (Eg: Just busy time vs bandwidth count vs no
> information etc) -- so having separate governors for each interconnect
> path makes a lot of sense. It also allows userspace to control the
> policy for scaling each of those paths based on product use cases.
> For example, when the GPU is just doing simple UI rendering, userspace
> can use the max_freq sysfs file for the devfreq device to disallow high
> bandwidth OPPs on the GPU<->DDR path, but those higher OPPs could be
> allowed by userspace when the GPU is used for games. Having devfreq
> device for each interconnect path also make it easy to debug
> performance issues -- you can independently change the votes for each
> path to figure out what is causing the bottleneck, etc.
> Adding a devfreq device for interconnect voting with a few lines gives
> all these features "for free".
> This doesn't mean all users of interconnect framework NEED to use
> devfreq for interconnect. They might do it simply based on
> calculations based on the use case (Eg: display driver from display
> resolution). But if they are trying to use any kind of
> algorithm/heuristics, writing it as a devfreq governor should be
> encouraged.
> Also want to point out that BW OPPs also work for drivers that don't
> use devfreq at all. The interconnect-opp-table just lists the
> meaningful OPP leveld for the path and the device driver can pick one
> entry from the table based on the use case.
> Thanks,
> Saravana

Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc, is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project

  reply index

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-06-14  4:17 [PATCH v2 00/11] Introduce Bandwidth OPPs & interconnect devfreq driver Saravana Kannan
2019-06-14  4:17 ` [PATCH v2 01/11] OPP: Allow required-opps even if the device doesn't have power-domains Saravana Kannan
2019-06-14  4:17 ` [PATCH v2 02/11] OPP: Add function to look up required OPP's for a given OPP Saravana Kannan
2019-06-14  4:17 ` [PATCH v2 03/11] PM / devfreq: Add required OPPs support to passive governor Saravana Kannan
2019-06-14  4:17 ` [PATCH v2 04/11] dt-bindings: opp: Introduce opp-peak-KBps and opp-avg-KBps bindings Saravana Kannan
2019-06-14  4:17 ` [PATCH v2 05/11] OPP: Add support for bandwidth OPP tables Saravana Kannan
2019-06-14  4:17 ` [PATCH v2 06/11] OPP: Add helper function " Saravana Kannan
2019-06-14  4:17 ` [PATCH v2 07/11] OPP: Add API to find an OPP table from its DT node Saravana Kannan
2019-06-14  4:17 ` [PATCH v2 08/11] dt-bindings: interconnect: Add interconnect-opp-table property Saravana Kannan
2019-06-14  4:17 ` [PATCH v2 09/11] interconnect: Add OPP table support for interconnects Saravana Kannan
2019-06-14  4:17 ` [PATCH v2 10/11] OPP: Allow copying OPPs tables between devices Saravana Kannan
2019-06-14  4:17 ` [PATCH v2 11/11] interconnect: Add devfreq support Saravana Kannan
2019-06-17 15:43   ` Georgi Djakov
2019-06-17 21:18     ` Saravana Kannan
2019-07-16 18:12       ` Sibi Sankar [this message]
2019-07-16 19:17         ` Saravana Kannan

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically 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:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

Linux-PM Archive on

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror linux-pm/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-pm linux-pm/ \
	public-inbox-index linux-pm

Newsgroup available over NNTP:

AGPL code for this site: git clone public-inbox