linux-arm-msm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bryan Huntsman <bryanh@codeaurora.org>
To: Kevin Hilman <khilman@deeprootsystems.com>
Cc: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@suse.de>,
	mark gross <markgross@thegnar.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pm_qos: Add system bus performance parameter
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 11:33:02 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C7804DE.9020008@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87hbigqg8d.fsf@deeprootsystems.com>

Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> writes:
> 
>> Some drivers/devices might need some minimum system bus performance to
>> provide acceptable service. Provide a PM QoS parameter to send these requests
>> to.
>>
>> The new parameter is named "system bus performance" since it is generic enough
>> for the unit of the request to be frequency, bandwidth or something else that
>> might be appropriate. It's up to each implementation of the QoS provider to
>> define what the unit of the request would be.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
> 
> With this current design, only one system-wide bus would be managed.
> What if a platform has more than one independently scalable bus?
> 
> I think the only scalable way to handle this kind of thing is to have
> per-device QoS constraints that can then be combined/aggregated by parent
> devices/busses.
> 
> At LPC this year, I've proposed per-device QoS constraints[1] as a topic
> for the PM mini-conf.  I hope some folks from the MSM camp can be there
> for these discussions.
> 
> Kevin
> 
> [1] http://www.linuxplumbersconf.org/2010/ocw/proposals/819

Yeah, I'm planning on rounding up some MSM folks for LPC this year. 
Power is a big concern for us so it would be good to join the 
discussion.  Initially, I was very keen on the per-device QoS contraints 
but I've since cooled on it.  For our HW, there's not a generic unit 
that can convey enough data for us to act on.  At least not w/o lookup 
tables, etc., at which point the unit loses it's value and becomes a 
generic handle.  I'm looking forward to a good group discussion on this 
topic.  Thanks.

- Bryan


-- 
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.

  reply	other threads:[~2010-08-27 18:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-08-27  4:13 Add system bus performance parameter Saravana Kannan
2010-08-27  4:13 ` [PATCH] pm_qos: " Saravana Kannan
2010-08-27  6:41   ` mark gross
2010-08-27  8:10     ` skannan
2010-08-27 10:17       ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-08-28  2:05       ` mark gross
2010-08-28  2:55         ` Saravana Kannan
2010-08-28 22:52           ` mark gross
2010-08-30 18:56             ` Kevin Hilman
2010-08-31 18:40               ` mark gross
2010-08-31 22:38                 ` Saravana Kannan
2010-09-01 14:28                   ` mark gross
2010-09-02  3:37                     ` Saravana Kannan
2010-09-02 14:09                       ` mark gross
2010-09-04  2:04                         ` Saravana Kannan
2010-09-17 20:32                         ` Saravana Kannan
2010-08-27 14:31   ` Kevin Hilman
2010-08-27 18:33     ` Bryan Huntsman [this message]
2010-08-28  1:55       ` mark gross
2010-08-28  2:09     ` mark gross
2010-08-28 23:05     ` mark gross
2010-09-02 14:05     ` mark gross
2010-09-02 20:09       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-09-07  5:42         ` mark gross
2010-09-07 21:43           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-08-27  4:19 ` Saravana Kannan

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=4C7804DE.9020008@codeaurora.org \
    --to=bryanh@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=James.Bottomley@suse.de \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=khilman@deeprootsystems.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=markgross@thegnar.org \
    --cc=mjg59@srcf.ucam.org \
    --cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
    --cc=skannan@codeaurora.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).