linux-acpi.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Ashwin Chaugule <ashwin.chaugule@linaro.org>
Cc: "rjw@rjwysocki.net" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	"jaswinder.singh@linaro.org" <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
	"linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org" <linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org>,
	"patches@linaro.org" <patches@linaro.org>,
	"viresh.kumar@linaro.org" <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/8] ACPI: Split out ACPI PSS from ACPI Processor driver
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 15:20:46 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <55AD03BE.4070209@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <09d1b5cf25ed3117b9e1b8feeb40ddf801557039.1436464513.git.ashwin.chaugule@linaro.org>



On 09/07/15 19:04, Ashwin Chaugule wrote:
> The ACPI processor driver is currently tied too closely
> to the ACPI P-states (PSS) and other related constructs
> for controlling CPU performance.
>
> The newer ACPI specification (v5.1 onwards) introduces
> alternative methods to PSS. These new mechanisms are
> described within each ACPI Processor object and so they
> need to be scanned whenever a new Processor object is detected.
> This patch introduces a new Kconfig symbol to allow for
> finer configurability among the two options for controlling
> performance states. There is no change in functionality and
> the option is auto-selected by the architecture Kconfig files.
>
> The following patchwork introduces CPPC: A newer method of
> controlling CPU performance. The OS is not expected to support
> CPPC and PSS at runtime. So the kconfig option lets us make
> these two mutually exclusive at compile time.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ashwin Chaugule <ashwin.chaugule@linaro.org>
> ---
>   arch/x86/Kconfig                |  1 +
>   drivers/acpi/Kconfig            | 19 ++++++---
>   drivers/acpi/Makefile           |  6 +--
>   drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c | 86 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
>   drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig         |  2 +-
>   drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.x86     |  2 +
>   include/acpi/processor.h        | 94 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
>   7 files changed, 142 insertions(+), 68 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> index 226d569..93d150d 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> @@ -143,6 +143,7 @@ config X86
>          select ACPI_LEGACY_TABLES_LOOKUP if ACPI
>          select X86_FEATURE_NAMES if PROC_FS
>          select SRCU
> +       select ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS if ACPI
>
>   config INSTRUCTION_DECODER
>          def_bool y
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
> index ab2cbb5..00748dc 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
> @@ -166,17 +166,26 @@ config ACPI_DOCK
>            This driver supports ACPI-controlled docking stations and removable
>            drive bays such as the IBM Ultrabay and the Dell Module Bay.
>
> +config ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS
> +       bool
> +       depends on ACPI_PROCESSOR && CPU_FREQ
> +       select THERMAL
> +       help
> +         This driver implements ACPI methods for controlling CPU performance
> +         using PSS methods as described in the ACPI spec. It also enables support
> +         for ACPI based performance throttling (TSS) and ACPI based thermal
> +         monitoring. It is required by several flavors of cpufreq
> +         performance-state drivers.
> +

Though I agree CPUFreq and the thermal control are related, having _PSS
in config name shouldn't match well IMO. You can have more generic name.

You are selecting one config while depending on the other, any
particular reason ?

I don't like adding these, but I leave it to Rafael.

Regards,
Sudeep

  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-07-20 14:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-07-09 18:04 [PATCH v7 0/8] CPUFreq driver using CPPC methods Ashwin Chaugule
2015-07-09 18:04 ` [PATCH v7 1/8] PCC: Initialize PCC Mailbox earlier at boot Ashwin Chaugule
2015-07-20 14:20   ` Sudeep Holla
2015-08-03 17:37     ` Ashwin Chaugule
2015-07-09 18:04 ` [PATCH v7 2/8] ACPI: Split out ACPI PSS from ACPI Processor driver Ashwin Chaugule
2015-07-18  0:01   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-18  0:03     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-08-03 17:26       ` Ashwin Chaugule
2015-08-03 17:24     ` Ashwin Chaugule
2015-07-20 14:20   ` Sudeep Holla [this message]
2015-07-20 21:59     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-08-03 17:49       ` Ashwin Chaugule
2015-08-03 17:29     ` Ashwin Chaugule
2015-08-04 14:50       ` Sudeep Holla
2015-07-09 18:04 ` [PATCH v7 3/8] ACPI: Decouple ACPI idle and ACPI processor drivers Ashwin Chaugule
2015-07-20 14:21   ` Sudeep Holla
2015-08-03 17:40     ` Ashwin Chaugule
2015-08-04 14:51       ` Sudeep Holla
2015-08-04 14:58         ` Ashwin Chaugule
2015-08-04 15:18           ` Sudeep Holla
2015-08-04 15:44             ` Ashwin Chaugule
2015-08-04 17:00               ` Sudeep Holla
2015-08-05 13:47                 ` Ashwin Chaugule
2015-07-09 18:04 ` [PATCH v7 4/8] ACPI: Introduce CPU performance controls using CPPC Ashwin Chaugule
2015-08-04 15:06   ` Sudeep Holla
2015-08-04 15:38     ` Ashwin Chaugule
2015-08-04 16:02       ` Sudeep Holla
2015-07-09 18:04 ` [PATCH v7 5/8] CPPC: Add a CPUFreq driver for use with CPPC Ashwin Chaugule
2015-07-20 14:22   ` Sudeep Holla
2015-07-20 22:07     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-21  8:52       ` Sudeep Holla
2015-07-21 14:27         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-21 15:32           ` Sudeep Holla
2015-07-09 18:04 ` [PATCH v7 6/8] ACPI: Add weak routines for ACPI CPU Hotplug Ashwin Chaugule
2015-07-09 18:04 ` [PATCH v7 7/8] CPPC: Probe for CPPC tables for each ACPI Processor object Ashwin Chaugule
2015-07-20 14:22   ` Sudeep Holla
2015-07-09 18:04 ` [PATCH v7 8/8] PCC: Enable PCC only when needed Ashwin Chaugule
2015-07-20 14:22   ` Sudeep Holla
2015-07-20 22:04     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-21  9:23       ` Sudeep Holla
2015-07-21 14:34         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-21 15:28           ` Sudeep Holla
2015-07-22  1:28             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-22  8:59               ` Sudeep Holla
2015-08-03 17:35               ` Ashwin Chaugule
2015-08-04 14:53                 ` Sudeep Holla

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=55AD03BE.4070209@arm.com \
    --to=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
    --cc=ashwin.chaugule@linaro.org \
    --cc=jaswinder.singh@linaro.org \
    --cc=linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=patches@linaro.org \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.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).