From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kevin Hilman Subject: Re: PM QoS dynamic resource manager Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 19:42:46 +0530 Message-ID: <1276265566.8214.2.camel@localhost> References: <20100525145223.GA4974@gvim.org> <20100608033333.GA23066@gvim.org> <4C0ECC38.2000003@codeaurora.org> <20100609030525.GD26668@gvim.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20100609030525.GD26668@gvim.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: markgross@thegnar.org Cc: mark gross <640e9920@gmail.com>, linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 20:05 -0700, mark gross wrote: > On Tue, Jun 08, 2010 at 04:03:20PM -0700, Bryan Huntsman wrote: > > > > Mike, one idea I'm exploring is having platform-specific busses with > > QoS constraints specified via runtime_pm as part of the LDM. Adding > > dynamic class creation within pm_qos, or a type enum as you suggest, > > would work. However, I think this kind of behavior would fit nicely > > within runtime_pm. > > > > Something like that is what Kevin Hilman was thinking too. It would > bring a qos concept to the LDM for each bus driver object. Yes, I definitely have some thoughts/ideas in this direction and is what we are doing on OMAP. I've been on the road, so I will chime in more on this next week when I get back... Kevin