Re: [PATCH v6 0/3] Better domain idle from device wakeup patterns

[Lina Iyer <ilina@codeaurora.org>]

On Wed, Dec 09 2020 at 03:37 -0700, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 18:26, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 11:51 PM Lina Iyer <ilina@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > The v5[1] of the series brought out some interesting discussions. The
>> > most important being is it worth adding the additional expense to all PM
>> > domains even if no wakeup pattern is available. It seems like
>> > maintaining a domain specific flag that the governor could check is a
>> > generic enough option. That should disable additional overhead for
>> > domains that do not need this feature.
>> >
>> > Ulf suggested that we could allow wakeups only if any of the domain idle
>> > state specifies a residency. However, we don't want to check for next
>> > wakeup everytime the domain enters idle just because the domain
>> > specifies an idle state with residency. This is also not desired.
>> >
>> > Also, if the domain checks for next wakeup, should the parent domains of
>> > the domain also check for next wakeup? And when do we set that up? These
>> > are questions that we don't know the answers yet. So, let's enable the
>> > domain governor only if the domain sets up the flag or when the device
>> > in the domain specifies the next wakeup.
>> >
>> > The previous post of the series explaining why this is a useful feature
>> > is v5[1]. Please let me know what you think.
>>
>> Ulf had comments on the previous versions, so waiting for him to
>> respond here, thanks!
>
>Yes, I will have a look, but please allow me some more time - it's a
>busy period for me.
>
Thank you.

-- Lina