Re: nokia 770 [was Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?]]

Re: nokia 770 [was Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?]]

[Scott E. Preece]

| From pavel@ucw.cz Tue Sep 19 13:27:27 2006
| ...
| > And if the only criteria for hardware-that-matters is hackability, then
| > Nokia 770 can be flashed with your own kernel and rootfs. Check
| > www.maemo.org
| 
| I agree that Nokia is doing the right thing (tm) here (and
| THANKS!). (Excluding charging circuity, but someone is going to fix
| that). Unfortunately Motorola is not doing the right thing...
---

Note that the 770 doesn't talk to a public network, over regulated
frequencies and power ranges, and isn't constrained by, for instance,
the GSM standards, and they're not constrained by the requirements
of middlemen (carriers), so it's not really an apples-to-apples
comparison.

That said, I do respect the way they have been working directly in
community projects.

scott
-- 
scott preece
motorola mobile devices, il67, 1800 s. oak st., champaign, il  61820  
e-mail:	preece@motorola.com	fax:	+1-217-384-8550
phone:	+1-217-384-8589	cell: +1-217-433-6114	pager: 2174336114@vtext.com

Re: nokia 770 [was Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?]]

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> | ...
> | > And if the only criteria for hardware-that-matters is hackability, then
> | > Nokia 770 can be flashed with your own kernel and rootfs. Check
> | > www.maemo.org
> | 
> | I agree that Nokia is doing the right thing (tm) here (and
> | THANKS!). (Excluding charging circuity, but someone is going to fix
> | that). Unfortunately Motorola is not doing the right thing...
> ---
> 
> Note that the 770 doesn't talk to a public network, over regulated
> frequencies and power ranges, and isn't constrained by, for instance,
> the GSM standards, and they're not constrained by the requirements
> of middlemen (carriers), so it's not really an apples-to-apples
> comparison.

Yes, 770 is in easier position...

> That said, I do respect the way they have been working directly in
> community projects.

...still, publicly downloadable SDK for userland software on
a1200/a780 would be nice. I do not think userland software can break
power levels/frequencies, so you should be okay, and symbian /
windowsCE certainly solved that problem before you...

To sum it up "it is nice that motorola uses linux, but you could do a
bit better".
								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?]

[Matthew Locke]

On Sep 14, 2006, at 2:12 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:

> Hi!
>
>>>> Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 21:36:37 +0200
>>>> From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
>>>>
>>>> Kernel interface is not something to be experimented with.
>>>
>>> Disagree.  How else to get it right??
>>> Try, learn, improve.  That's experimentation.
>>> Linux has no "stable API nonsense" ...
>>>
>>> The point of "cathedral vs. bazaar" was that experimentation
>>> and evolution are more successful processes than "get it
>>> right the first time".
>> ---
>>
>> I think Pavel's point was that the userspace interface to
>> the kernel (at least the syscall interface) is stable (open to
>> Extension by addition of syscalls, but closed to modification
>> or deletion of existing and that any experimentation needs to
>> happen before functionality goes into the mainstream.
>
> Yes, that was my point. (And I'd add "plus you can't get around that
> by introducing interface hidden by #ifdef").
>
>> That said, I do think we probably need to add a new interface to
>> cover operating points, because some of believe that policy needs
>> to be in user space and the whole point of the OP abstraction is
>> that operating points are atomic. You can't just add knobs to
>> control more factors, because all those knobs need to be turned
>> at the same time. Setting an operating point is inherently an
>> atomic operation, not n separate operations that can be taken
>> serially.
>
> Ok, "needs to be atomic" is first real argument for OP abstraction. I
> wonder if we can get around that by delaying the transaction until
> userspace tells us it made all the changes... otoh that is going to be
> messy.
>
> But do you have some reasonable way to integrate OP with cpufreq?

Yes, it was presented in the PowerOP/cpufreq integration patches.  The 
cpufreq_driver layer is the natural integration point.

>
> 								Pavel
> -- 
> (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
> (cesky, pictures) 
> http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
> _______________________________________________
> linux-pm mailing list
> linux-pm@lists.osdl.org
> https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
>

Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?]

[Eugeny S. Mints]

Matthew Locke wrote:
> On Sep 14, 2006, at 2:12 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> 
>> Hi!
>>
>>>>> Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 21:36:37 +0200
>>>>> From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
>>>>>
>>>>> Kernel interface is not something to be experimented with.
>>>> Disagree.  How else to get it right??
>>>> Try, learn, improve.  That's experimentation.
>>>> Linux has no "stable API nonsense" ...
>>>>
>>>> The point of "cathedral vs. bazaar" was that experimentation
>>>> and evolution are more successful processes than "get it
>>>> right the first time".
>>> ---
>>>
>>> I think Pavel's point was that the userspace interface to
>>> the kernel (at least the syscall interface) is stable (open to
>>> Extension by addition of syscalls, but closed to modification
>>> or deletion of existing and that any experimentation needs to
>>> happen before functionality goes into the mainstream.
>> Yes, that was my point. (And I'd add "plus you can't get around that
>> by introducing interface hidden by #ifdef").
>>
>>> That said, I do think we probably need to add a new interface to
>>> cover operating points, because some of believe that policy needs
>>> to be in user space and the whole point of the OP abstraction is
>>> that operating points are atomic. You can't just add knobs to
>>> control more factors, because all those knobs need to be turned
>>> at the same time. Setting an operating point is inherently an
>>> atomic operation, not n separate operations that can be taken
>>> serially.
>> Ok, "needs to be atomic" is first real argument for OP abstraction. I
>> wonder if we can get around that by delaying the transaction until
>> userspace tells us it made all the changes... otoh that is going to be
>> messy.
>>
>> But do you have some reasonable way to integrate OP with cpufreq?
> 
> Yes, it was presented in the PowerOP/cpufreq integration patches.  The 
> cpufreq_driver layer is the natural integration point.
Exactly.

Separate or one universal user space<->kernel interface is another story. 
Universal is preferred of course and in two words to achieve universal interface 
current cpufreq interface needs to be improved - but remains unchanged for user 
space !!!! - in the way to handle "chose closet predefined frequency to an 
arbitrary freq value echo'ed into /sys/cpufreq/cpuN/freq" functionality in user 
space instead of in the kernel. Assuming that frequency attribute is exported 
for all available operating points it is possible to implement the "cpufreq 
frequency selection logic" in user space and having such functionality in the 
kernel just violates the main rule of having everything possible outside of the 
kernel.

More details here:
http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/linux-pm/2006-September/003660.html
and here
http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/linux-pm/2006-September/003671.html

Paval, plz NOTE, that  you don't have lkml in CC on this thread and I personally 
feel that you've brought a really terrible confusion to everyone with your lkml 
step. I'm wondering whether you are braking "no cross postings" rule as well.....

Eugeny
> 
>> 								Pavel
>> -- 
>> (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
>> (cesky, pictures) 
>> http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
>> _______________________________________________
>> linux-pm mailing list
>> linux-pm@lists.osdl.org
>> https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-pm mailing list
> linux-pm@lists.osdl.org
> https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
> 

Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?]

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> operating points it is possible to implement the "cpufreq frequency 
> selection logic" in user space and having such functionality in the kernel 
> just violates the main rule of having everything possible outside of the 
> kernel.

You got the rules wrong. "Keep the code out of kernel" is important
rule, but probably not the main one.

> Paval, plz NOTE, that  you don't have lkml in CC on this thread and I 
> personally feel that you've brought a really terrible confusion to everyone 
> with your lkml step. I'm wondering whether you are braking "no cross 
> postings" rule as well.....

Cc-ing lkml is considered okay.

Anyway, please do _proper_ submission, cc-ing lkml, explaining why it
is needed so that me and lkml actually know what is going on. Include
those "elevator pitches".
									Pavel

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?]

[Vitaly Wool]

Pavel,

On 9/14/06, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > operating points it is possible to implement the "cpufreq frequency
> > selection logic" in user space and having such functionality in the kernel
> > just violates the main rule of having everything possible outside of the
> > kernel.
>
> You got the rules wrong. "Keep the code out of kernel" is important
> rule, but probably not the main one.

from aside, it looks like you're choosing 'rules' and assign then
'priorities' in a too arbitrary way which is by a strange accident
fits your point of view best of all.
May I remind you that Linux world is not only laptops and Sharp Zaurus? ;)

Thanks,
   Vitaly

Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?]

[Pavel Machek]

> Pavel,

> > > operating points it is possible to implement the "cpufreq frequency
> > > selection logic" in user space and having such functionality in the kernel
> > > just violates the main rule of having everything possible outside of the
> > > kernel.
> >
> > You got the rules wrong. "Keep the code out of kernel" is important
> > rule, but probably not the main one.
> 
> from aside, it looks like you're choosing 'rules' and assign then
> 'priorities' in a too arbitrary way which is by a strange accident
> fits your point of view best of all.
> May I remind you that Linux world is not only laptops and Sharp Zaurus? ;)

Actually, laptops and zauruses seem to be the only "interesting"
machines from pm perspective. Then there are Motorola cellphones, but
Motorola tried hard not to enable users changing kernel... so they are
irrelevant.
								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?]

[David Brownell]

> > May I remind you that Linux world is not only laptops and Sharp Zaurus? ;)
>
> Actually, laptops and zauruses seem to be the only "interesting"
> machines from pm perspective. Then there are Motorola cellphones, but
> Motorola tried hard not to enable users changing kernel... so they are
> irrelevant.

Get yourself some OMAP hardware then; your blinders are way too effective!

OMAP1 hardware is easily had; an OSK, or a Nokia N770.  The latter is
battery powered already, without the hardware mods...

- Dave

Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?]

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > > May I remind you that Linux world is not only laptops and Sharp Zaurus? ;)
> >
> > Actually, laptops and zauruses seem to be the only "interesting"
> > machines from pm perspective. Then there are Motorola cellphones, but
> > Motorola tried hard not to enable users changing kernel... so they are
> > irrelevant.
> 
> Get yourself some OMAP hardware then; your blinders are way too effective!
> 
> OMAP1 hardware is easily had; an OSK, or a Nokia N770.  The latter is
> battery powered already, without the hardware mods...

Well, I already have zaurus, and nokia 770 is inferior AFAICT. So the
next one will be linux cellphone...

(And IIRC zaurus lasts longer on batteries than 770 does... or at
least comparable. Maybe OMAP is more complex, but is it actually good
thing?)
								Pavel

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?]

[Amit Kucheria]

On Sun, 2006-09-17 at 14:34 +0200, ext Pavel Machek wrote:

> > OMAP1 hardware is easily had; an OSK, or a Nokia N770.  The latter is
> > battery powered already, without the hardware mods...
> 
> Well, I already have zaurus, and nokia 770 is inferior AFAICT. So the
> next one will be linux cellphone...
> 
> (And IIRC zaurus lasts longer on batteries than 770 does... or at
> least comparable. Maybe OMAP is more complex, but is it actually good
> thing?)
> 								Pavel

Wifi + Significantly higher resolution display tend to play a 'small'
role in this.

-- 
Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@nokia.com>
Nokia

Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?]

[Pavel Machek]

On Mon 2006-09-18 13:46:04, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-09-17 at 14:34 +0200, ext Pavel Machek wrote:
> 
> > > OMAP1 hardware is easily had; an OSK, or a Nokia N770.  The latter is
> > > battery powered already, without the hardware mods...
> > 
> > Well, I already have zaurus, and nokia 770 is inferior AFAICT. So the
> > next one will be linux cellphone...
> > 
> > (And IIRC zaurus lasts longer on batteries than 770 does... or at
> > least comparable. Maybe OMAP is more complex, but is it actually good
> > thing?)
> 
> Wifi + Significantly higher resolution display tend to play a 'small'
> role in this.

640x480 display vs. 800x480 display does not sound like _that_ big
deal to me. You are right with wifi, that beasts eat 1W-or-so. (and it
would be great if someone implemented wifi power saving...)

								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?]

[Igor Stoppa]

On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 12:53 +0200, ext Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Mon 2006-09-18 13:46:04, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> > On Sun, 2006-09-17 at 14:34 +0200, ext Pavel Machek wrote:
> > 
> > > > OMAP1 hardware is easily had; an OSK, or a Nokia N770.  The latter is
> > > > battery powered already, without the hardware mods...
> > > 
> > > Well, I already have zaurus, and nokia 770 is inferior AFAICT. So the
> > > next one will be linux cellphone...
> > > 
> > > (And IIRC zaurus lasts longer on batteries than 770 does... or at
> > > least comparable. Maybe OMAP is more complex, but is it actually good
> > > thing?)
> > 
> > Wifi + Significantly higher resolution display tend to play a 'small'
> > role in this.
> 
> 640x480 display vs. 800x480 display does not sound like _that_ big
> deal to me. You are right with wifi, that beasts eat 1W-or-so. (and it
> would be great if someone implemented wifi power saving...)
> 
> 								Pavel

wifi power saving does exist and you have it already in 770
and also color depth probably affects performance: do they have the same
number of bits per pixel?
-- 
Cheers,
           Igor

Igor Stoppa (Nokia M - OSSO / Tampere)

nokia 770 [was Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?]]

[Pavel Machek]

On Mon 2006-09-18 15:01:15, Igor Stoppa wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 12:53 +0200, ext Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Mon 2006-09-18 13:46:04, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2006-09-17 at 14:34 +0200, ext Pavel Machek wrote:

> > > > (And IIRC zaurus lasts longer on batteries than 770 does... or at
> > > > least comparable. Maybe OMAP is more complex, but is it actually good
> > > > thing?)
> > > 
> > > Wifi + Significantly higher resolution display tend to play a 'small'
> > > role in this.
> > 
> > 640x480 display vs. 800x480 display does not sound like _that_ big
> > deal to me. You are right with wifi, that beasts eat 1W-or-so. (and it
> > would be great if someone implemented wifi power saving...)
> 
> wifi power saving does exist and you have it already in 770
> and also color depth probably affects performance: do they have the same
> number of bits per pixel?

Not sure, but I believe it has 65000 colors.

What wireless chip is included in 770? Are you using devicespace
stack? Is wifi driver opensource?
								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Re: nokia 770 [was Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?]]

[Amit Kucheria]

On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 14:11 +0200, ext Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Mon 2006-09-18 15:01:15, Igor Stoppa wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 12:53 +0200, ext Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > On Mon 2006-09-18 13:46:04, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 2006-09-17 at 14:34 +0200, ext Pavel Machek wrote:
> 
> > > > > (And IIRC zaurus lasts longer on batteries than 770 does... or at
> > > > > least comparable. Maybe OMAP is more complex, but is it actually good
> > > > > thing?)
> > > > 
> > > > Wifi + Significantly higher resolution display tend to play a 'small'
> > > > role in this.
> > > 
> > > 640x480 display vs. 800x480 display does not sound like _that_ big
> > > deal to me. You are right with wifi, that beasts eat 1W-or-so. (and it
> > > would be great if someone implemented wifi power saving...)
> > 
> > wifi power saving does exist and you have it already in 770
> > and also color depth probably affects performance: do they have the same
> > number of bits per pixel?
> 
> Not sure, but I believe it has 65000 colors.
> 
> What wireless chip is included in 770? Are you using devicespace
> stack? Is wifi driver opensource?
> 								Pavel

It is similar to other 'open-sourced' drivers - binary firmware, open
source driver.

Anyways... this is getting off-topic. Sharp Zaurus was great hardware,
but its not shipped in USA/Europe anymore.

And if the only criteria for hardware-that-matters is hackability, then
Nokia 770 can be flashed with your own kernel and rootfs. Check
www.maemo.org

Regards,
Amit

-- 
Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@nokia.com>
Nokia

Re: nokia 770 [was Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?]]

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > > > 640x480 display vs. 800x480 display does not sound like _that_ big
> > > > deal to me. You are right with wifi, that beasts eat 1W-or-so. (and it
> > > > would be great if someone implemented wifi power saving...)
> > > 
> > > wifi power saving does exist and you have it already in 770
> > > and also color depth probably affects performance: do they have the same
> > > number of bits per pixel?
> > 
> > Not sure, but I believe it has 65000 colors.
> > 
> > What wireless chip is included in 770? Are you using devicespace
> > stack? Is wifi driver opensource?
> 
> It is similar to other 'open-sourced' drivers - binary firmware, open
> source driver.

Ok.

> Anyways... this is getting off-topic. Sharp Zaurus was great hardware,
> but its not shipped in USA/Europe anymore.

Agreed, this is getting off-topic.

> And if the only criteria for hardware-that-matters is hackability, then
> Nokia 770 can be flashed with your own kernel and rootfs. Check
> www.maemo.org

I agree that Nokia is doing the right thing (tm) here (and
THANKS!). (Excluding charging circuity, but someone is going to fix
that). Unfortunately Motorola is not doing the right thing...

Could you perhaps provide list of operating points for 770? It would
help understanding a bit, I'd say.
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html