From: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: Stephan Gerhold <stephan@gerhold.net>,
Viresh Kumar <vireshk@kernel.org>, Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Stephan Gerhold <stephan.gerhold@kernkonzept.com>,
Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>,
Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] OPP: Use _set_opp_level() for single genpd case
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2023 14:50:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPDyKFpgPdMLR12ajYFasCjm-Y-ZyVVtQz3j1CZVWfN9T3Gg0w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231106070830.7sd3ux3nvywpb54z@vireshk-i7>
On Mon, 6 Nov 2023 at 08:08, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 03-11-23, 12:58, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > Are you saying that the OPP library should be capable of managing the
> > parent-clock-rates too, when there is a new rate being requested for a
> > clock that belongs to an OPP? To me, that sounds like replicating
> > framework specific knowledge into the OPP library, no? Why do we want
> > this?
>
> I am surely not touching clocks or any other framework :)
>
> > Unless I totally misunderstood your suggestion, I think it would be
> > better if the OPP library remained simple and didn't run recursive
> > calls, but instead relied on each framework to manage the aggregation
> > and propagation to parents.
>
> I see your point and agree with it.
Okay!
>
> Here is the problem and I am not very sure what's the way forward for this then:
>
> - Devices can have other devices (like caches) or genpds mentioned via
> required-opps.
>
> - Same is true for genpds, they can also have required-opps, which may or may not
> be other genpds.
>
> - When OPP core is asked to set a device's OPP, it isn't only about performance
> level, but clk, level, regulator, bw, etc. And so a full call to
> dev_pm_opp_set_opp() is required.
>
> - The OPP core is going to run the helper recursively only for required-opps and
> hence it won't affect clock or regulators.
What if a required-opps has a clock or regulator? Doesn't that mean
that clocks/regulators could be called too?
>
> - But it currently affects genpds as they are mentioned in required-opps.
>
> - Skipping the recursive call to a parent genpd will require a special hack,
> maybe we should add it, I am just discussing it if we should or if there is
> another way around this.
Right, I see.
If this is only for required-opps and devices being hooked up to a PM
domain (genpd), my suggestion would be to keep avoiding doing the
propagation to required-opps-parents. For the similar reasons to why
we don't do it for clock/regulators, the propagation and aggregation,
seems to me, to belong better in genpd.
Did that make sense?
Kind regards
Uffe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-10 18:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-19 10:21 [RFT PATCH 0/2] OPP: Simplify required-opp handling Viresh Kumar
2023-10-19 10:22 ` [PATCH 1/2] OPP: Use _set_opp_level() for single genpd case Viresh Kumar
2023-10-19 11:16 ` Ulf Hansson
2023-10-20 3:45 ` Viresh Kumar
2023-10-20 10:02 ` Ulf Hansson
2023-10-20 10:56 ` Viresh Kumar
2023-10-20 11:09 ` Ulf Hansson
2023-10-25 6:54 ` Viresh Kumar
2023-10-25 10:40 ` Ulf Hansson
2023-10-25 10:48 ` Viresh Kumar
2023-10-25 13:47 ` Stephan Gerhold
2023-10-25 15:24 ` Viresh Kumar
2023-10-25 16:16 ` Stephan Gerhold
2023-10-26 9:53 ` Ulf Hansson
2023-10-30 10:29 ` Viresh Kumar
2023-11-03 11:58 ` Ulf Hansson
2023-11-06 7:08 ` Viresh Kumar
2023-11-10 13:50 ` Ulf Hansson [this message]
2023-11-15 5:32 ` Viresh Kumar
2023-11-16 10:44 ` Viresh Kumar
2023-10-19 10:22 ` [PATCH 2/2] OPP: Call dev_pm_opp_set_opp() for required OPPs Viresh Kumar
2023-10-24 11:18 ` Stephan Gerhold
2023-10-25 7:36 ` Viresh Kumar
2023-10-25 12:17 ` Stephan Gerhold
2023-10-25 15:20 ` Viresh Kumar
2023-10-25 16:03 ` Ulf Hansson
2023-10-26 7:44 ` Viresh Kumar
2023-10-25 13:51 ` Ulf Hansson
2023-10-25 15:09 ` 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=CAPDyKFpgPdMLR12ajYFasCjm-Y-ZyVVtQz3j1CZVWfN9T3Gg0w@mail.gmail.com \
--to=ulf.hansson@linaro.org \
--cc=konrad.dybcio@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org \
--cc=nm@ti.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=sboyd@kernel.org \
--cc=stephan.gerhold@kernkonzept.com \
--cc=stephan@gerhold.net \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
--cc=vireshk@kernel.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).