From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org by pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org (Dovecot) with LMTP id ajLhDfpaGlsfZwAAmS7hNA ; Fri, 08 Jun 2018 10:31:25 +0000 Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E7E39607A4; Fri, 8 Jun 2018 10:31:24 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=2.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58C6A601C3; Fri, 8 Jun 2018 10:31:24 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org 58C6A601C3 Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752478AbeFHKbV (ORCPT + 25 others); Fri, 8 Jun 2018 06:31:21 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:60570 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751079AbeFHKbU (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jun 2018 06:31:20 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A21CE1596; Fri, 8 Jun 2018 03:31:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e108498-lin.cambridge.arm.com (e108498-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.211.46]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AC5BA3F59D; Fri, 8 Jun 2018 03:31:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 11:31:14 +0100 From: Quentin Perret To: Juri Lelli Cc: Dietmar Eggemann , peterz@infradead.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, morten.rasmussen@arm.com, chris.redpath@arm.com, patrick.bellasi@arm.com, valentin.schneider@arm.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, thara.gopinath@linaro.org, viresh.kumar@linaro.org, tkjos@google.com, joelaf@google.com, smuckle@google.com, adharmap@quicinc.com, skannan@quicinc.com, pkondeti@codeaurora.org, edubezval@gmail.com, srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com, currojerez@riseup.net, javi.merino@kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 03/10] PM: Introduce an Energy Model management framework Message-ID: <20180608103113.GB418@e108498-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <20180521142505.6522-1-quentin.perret@arm.com> <20180521142505.6522-4-quentin.perret@arm.com> <20180607144409.GB3311@localhost.localdomain> <20180607151954.GA3597@e108498-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <52b9575b-4c2a-01df-fadd-10ccf3146112@arm.com> <20180608082511.GE3597@e108498-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20180608093613.GD658@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180608093613.GD658@localhost.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.3 (2017-05-23) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday 08 Jun 2018 at 11:36:13 (+0200), Juri Lelli wrote: > On 08/06/18 09:25, Quentin Perret wrote: > > Hi Dietmar, > > > > On Thursday 07 Jun 2018 at 17:55:32 (+0200), Dietmar Eggemann wrote: > > [...] > > > > IMHO, part of the problem why this might be harder to understand is the fact > > > that the patches show the use of the 2. init call > > > 'em_rescale_cpu_capacity()' but not the 1. one 'em_register_freq_domain()'. > > > I guess that Quentin wanted to keep the set as small as possible. > > > > Yes, this is confusing. I'm now starting to think that patch 10/10 should > > probably not be part of this patch-set, especially if I don't provide > > the patches registering the freq domains from the CPUFreq drivers. And > > it's the only "Arm-specific" patch in this arch-independent patch-set. > > > > So I think I'll drop patch 10/10 for v4 ... That part should be > > discussed separately, with the rest of the Arm-specific changes. > > Mmm, I would actually vote to at least have one example showing how and > where the em_register_freq_domain() is going to be used. I had to look > at the repo you referenced since I think it's quite fundamental piece to > understand the design, IMHO. Hmmm I see your point. OK, having an example will help. I'll keep patch 10/10 and add an other one tweaking cpufreq-dt to give an example. But I'll mark the two as OPTIONAL. I really hope we can reach an agreement on the core design ideas before discussing too much the details on the driver side. There are several valid places where em_register_freq_domain() can be called. But the exact way of doing so will be platform-dependent, and driver-dependent, so let's agree on what we want to know from the drivers first :-) Thanks, Quentin