From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tomeu Vizoso Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] Add support for Tegra Activity Monitor Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 15:14:28 +0100 Message-ID: <548703C4.1030300@collabora.com> References: <1417709696-29281-1-git-send-email-tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Alexandre Courbot Cc: "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , Javier Martinez Canillas , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 12/09/2014 06:38 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote: > On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 1:14 AM, Tomeu Vizoso wrote: >> Hello, >> >> this v3 addresses the comments that the devfreq implementation got, namely: >> >> * Address misc. style issues found by Thierry and Alexander >> * Added helpers for register i/o >> * Further documented the structs >> * Enable the ACTMON after the IRQ handler has been installed >> * Disable the ACTMON before removing the IRQ handler >> * Add governor in a subsys initcall >> >> There's an open question on whether some functionality currently in this >> devfreq driver should be moved into the devfreq framework, but without knowing >> of other SoC family that would benefit from it, I'm reticent. It would be >> great to hear from the devfreq maintainers if they have any plans regarding >> this, or if they have any suggestion. > > I cannot make a thorough review because of the problem I mentioned in > patch 3/3, but I am guessing this series is converging towards what we > want. Now the main question will be how we can leverage Arto's > watermark series for this one. I am ready to bet that doing so can > reduce quite a lot of code. > > Since you are likely to be the first user of the watermarking feature, > could you comment on its potential shortcomings and whatever needs to > be fixed to best implement ACTMON support using it? I will try to push > it myself, but you are obviously in a better position to understand > what is needed. Sure, I'm still playing with the idea, but I have sent a few questions to that thread already. Cheers, Tomeu > Thanks! >