LKML Archive on
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Sibi Sankar <>
	Kyungmin Park <>,
	Chanwoo Choi <>,
	Rob Herring <>,
	Mark Rutland <>,,,,,,,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] PM / devfreq: Generic CPU frequency to device frequency mapping governor
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 00:15:28 +0530
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

Hi Saravana,

On 2018-08-07 11:19, wrote:
> On 2018-08-02 14:00, wrote:
>> On 2018-08-02 02:56, MyungJoo Ham wrote:
>>>> Many CPU architectures have caches that can scale independent of the 
>>>> CPUs.
>>>> Frequency scaling of the caches is necessary to make sure the cache 
>>>> is not
>>>> a performance bottleneck that leads to poor performance and power. 
>>>> The same
>>>> idea applies for RAM/DDR.
>>>> To achieve this, this patch adds a generic devfreq governor that 
>>>> takes the
>>>> current frequency of each CPU frequency domain and then adjusts the
>>>> frequency of the cache (or any devfreq device) based on the 
>>>> frequency of
>>>> the CPUs. It listens to CPU frequency transition notifiers to keep 
>>>> itself
>>>> up to date on the current CPU frequency.

With the cpu-freq driver for SDM845 SoC supporting fast_switch and 
schedutil supporting
dynamic switching wouldn't this governor be incompatible due to its 
reliance on transition
notifiers? Is it planned to be used only with ondemand/performance 

>>>> To decide the frequency of the device, the governor does one of the
>>>> following:
>>> This exactly has the same purpose with "passive" governor except for 
>>> the
>>> single part: passive governor depends on another devfreq driver, not
>>> cpufreq driver.
>>> If both governors have many features in common, can you merge them 
>>> into one?
>>> Passive governor also has "get_target_freq", which allows driver 
>>> authors
>>> to define the mapping.
>> Thanks for the review and pointing me to the passive governor. I agree
>> that at a high level they are both doing the same. I can certainly
>> stuff this CPU freq to dev freq mapping into passive governor, but I
>> think it'll just make one huge set of code that's harder to understand
>> and maintain because it trying to do different things under the hood.
>> There are also a bunch of complexities and optimizations that come
>> with the cpufreq-map governor that don't fit with the passive
>> governor.
>> 1. It's not one CPU who's frequency we have to listen to. There are
>> multiple CPUs/policies we have to aggregate across.
>> 2. We have to deal with big vs little having different needs/mappings.
>> 3. Since it's always just CPUfreq, I can optimize the handling in the
>> transition notifiers. If I have 4 different devices that are scaled
>> based on CPU freq, I still use only 1 transition notifier. It becomes
>> a bit harder to do with the passive governor.
>> 4. It requires that the device explicitly support the passive governor
>> and pick a mapping function. With cpufreq-map governor, the device
>> drivers don't need to make any changes. Whoever is making a
>> device/board can choose what devices to scale up base on CPU freq
>> based on their board and their needs. Even an end user can say, scale
>> the GPU based on my CPU based on interpolation if they choose to.
>> 5. If a device has some other use for the private data, it can't work
>> with passive governor, but can work with cpufreq-map governor.
>> 6. I also want to improve cpufreq-map governor to handle hotplug
>> correctly in later patches (needs more discussion) and that'll add
>> more complexity.
>> I think for these reasons we shouldn't combine these two governors.
>> Let me know what you think.
> Friendly reminder.
> Thanks,
> Saravana

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

  reply index

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-08-02  0:57 Saravana Kannan
     [not found] ` <CGME20180802005756epcas4p465a12f42a0e36f0af6fd276a3a56957f@epcms1p3>
2018-08-02  9:56   ` MyungJoo Ham
2018-08-02 21:00     ` skannan
2018-08-07  5:49       ` skannan
2018-09-10 18:45         ` Sibi Sankar [this message]
2018-08-07 16:41 ` Rob Herring
2018-08-07 19:37   ` skannan
2018-08-08  8:47     ` Sudeep Holla
2018-08-08 21:18       ` skannan
2018-08-09  9:43         ` Sudeep Holla

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

LKML Archive on

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror lkml/git/0.git
	git clone --mirror lkml/git/1.git
	git clone --mirror lkml/git/2.git
	git clone --mirror lkml/git/3.git
	git clone --mirror lkml/git/4.git
	git clone --mirror lkml/git/5.git
	git clone --mirror lkml/git/6.git
	git clone --mirror lkml/git/7.git

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

Newsgroup available over NNTP:

AGPL code for this site: git clone public-inbox