From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Viresh Kumar Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] thermal: mediatek: Add cpu power cooling model. Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 08:54:33 +0530 Message-ID: <20151106032433.GL3773@ubuntu> References: <1445515359-8587-1-git-send-email-dawei.chien@mediatek.com> <1445515359-8587-2-git-send-email-dawei.chien@mediatek.com> <20151104193958.GC14127@localhost.localdomain> <1446721837.4016.57.camel@mtksdaap41> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1446721837.4016.57.camel@mtksdaap41> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: dawei chien , Javi Merino Cc: Eduardo Valentin , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala , Matthias Brugger , Daniel Kurtz , Sascha Hauer , Daniel Lezcano , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, srv_heupstream@mediatek.com, Sascha Hauer List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Cc'ing Javi (which you should have as he wrote the power-thing for cpu-cooling). On 05-11-15, 19:10, dawei chien wrote: > This is because our platform currently only support mt8173_cpufreq.c, so > that I only add static power model for our owner IC. Bindings are (normally) supposed to be general than a platform specific. > Please understanding that I wouldn't give a DT binding document since I > will remove static power table on next version, but I can try to explain > it. Then just don't add things in the first place. > As far as I know, static power is somewhat leakage of CPU clusters, so > that we hardly to find a formula, which can suitable all kinds of CPUs > since leakage is different. In ARM IPA framework, static power only need > to be defined by who register cpufreq_power_cooling_register. The > voltage/power table is just one way to present leakage power of CPUs. The bindings don't fix the values for static power, but just provides a field for platforms to use. Everyone can then send its own power figures. Why do you thing it can't be generalized? > Actually, static power is optional since dynamic power is much more than > static power. Maybe, we should still capture it. @Javi ? -- viresh