All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: mark gross <markgross@thegnar.org>
To: "Pihet-XID, Jean" <j-pihet@ti.com>
Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>,
	Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@google.com>,
	markgross <markgross@thegnar.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Linux PM mailing list <linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] CPU C-state breakage with PM Qos change
Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2012 19:50:57 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120205035057.GA4948@gs62> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAN5iSWo-n7OER4i1tPoeGBhY_RY-nX=7n4B3mFv1f0JK074bhQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 03:04:43PM +0100, Pihet-XID, Jean wrote:
> Looping in linux-pm
> 
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 1:14 AM, Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@google.com> wrote:
> > Looks like change "PM QoS: Move and rename the implementation files"
> > made pm_qos depend on CONFIG_PM which depends on
> > PM_SLEEP || PM_RUNTIME
> >
> > That breaks CPU C-states with kernels not having these CONFIGs, causing CPUs
> > to spend time in Polling loop idle instead of going into deep C-states,
> > consuming way way more power. This is with either acpi idle or intel idle
> > enabled.
> >
> > Either CONFIG_PM should be enabled with any pm_qos users or
> > the !CONFIG_PM pm_qos_request() should return sane defaults not to break
> > the existing users. Here's is the patch for the latter option.
> I think the real question is whether PM QoS should be functional in
> all cases (as is ACPI) or whether only if certain options are set
> (CONFIG_PM).
> In the current code if CONFIG_PM is not enabled, a dummy PM QoS API is
> provided as function stubs in order for the build to succeed.
> 
> Rafael, Mark,
> What do you think? Should PM QoS be enabled in all cases? Are there
> any known dependencies with CONFIG_PM?

Yes I do think pm_qos interfaces should be enabled all the time and be
independent of CONFIG_PM.  Also, I still am not a fan of the renaming
patch but, as the argument for and against renaming cannot be based on
quantifiable things I've chosen not to let it bother me.

I think Venki's change is a band aid and we should fix it right by not
having a dependency on config_pm for the interface to behave.

I'll take a look at why there is now a dependency before I have more to
say.

--mark

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: mark gross <markgross@thegnar.org>
To: "Pihet-XID, Jean" <j-pihet@ti.com>
Cc: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@google.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
	markgross <markgross@thegnar.org>, Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	Linux PM mailing list <linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] CPU C-state breakage with PM Qos change
Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2012 19:50:57 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120205035057.GA4948@gs62> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAN5iSWo-n7OER4i1tPoeGBhY_RY-nX=7n4B3mFv1f0JK074bhQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 03:04:43PM +0100, Pihet-XID, Jean wrote:
> Looping in linux-pm
> 
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 1:14 AM, Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@google.com> wrote:
> > Looks like change "PM QoS: Move and rename the implementation files"
> > made pm_qos depend on CONFIG_PM which depends on
> > PM_SLEEP || PM_RUNTIME
> >
> > That breaks CPU C-states with kernels not having these CONFIGs, causing CPUs
> > to spend time in Polling loop idle instead of going into deep C-states,
> > consuming way way more power. This is with either acpi idle or intel idle
> > enabled.
> >
> > Either CONFIG_PM should be enabled with any pm_qos users or
> > the !CONFIG_PM pm_qos_request() should return sane defaults not to break
> > the existing users. Here's is the patch for the latter option.
> I think the real question is whether PM QoS should be functional in
> all cases (as is ACPI) or whether only if certain options are set
> (CONFIG_PM).
> In the current code if CONFIG_PM is not enabled, a dummy PM QoS API is
> provided as function stubs in order for the build to succeed.
> 
> Rafael, Mark,
> What do you think? Should PM QoS be enabled in all cases? Are there
> any known dependencies with CONFIG_PM?

Yes I do think pm_qos interfaces should be enabled all the time and be
independent of CONFIG_PM.  Also, I still am not a fan of the renaming
patch but, as the argument for and against renaming cannot be based on
quantifiable things I've chosen not to let it bother me.

I think Venki's change is a band aid and we should fix it right by not
having a dependency on config_pm for the interface to behave.

I'll take a look at why there is now a dependency before I have more to
say.

--mark

  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-02-05  3:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-02-02 23:57 [PATCH] CPU C-state breakage with PM Qos change Venkatesh Pallipadi
2012-02-03  0:14 ` Venkatesh Pallipadi
2012-02-03 14:04   ` Pihet-XID, Jean
2012-02-03 14:04     ` Pihet-XID, Jean
2012-02-03 20:02     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-02-03 20:02       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-02-05  3:50     ` mark gross [this message]
2012-02-05  3:50       ` mark gross
2012-02-05 11:04       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-02-06 10:18         ` Jean Pihet
2012-02-06 10:18           ` [linux-pm] " Jean Pihet
2012-02-06 16:42           ` Jean Pihet
2012-02-06 16:42             ` [linux-pm] " Jean Pihet
2012-02-06 20:16             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-02-06 20:16               ` [linux-pm] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-02-07  8:39               ` Jean Pihet
2012-02-07  8:39                 ` [linux-pm] " Jean Pihet

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=20120205035057.GA4948@gs62 \
    --to=markgross@thegnar.org \
    --cc=j-pihet@ti.com \
    --cc=khilman@ti.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=venki@google.com \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.