Re: Alternative Concept [Was: Re: [RFC] CPUFreq PowerOP integration, Intro 0/3]

Pavel Machek
2006-10-13T10:55:04Z

Hi!

> That's it. Bottom line is: what you are talking about is NOT an Alternative
> Concept but a particular case instead. While PowerOP design is
> generic case.

Fine then; submit powerOP with interface Dominik suggested. Notice
that his solution exposes all the knobs to userspace directly, so his
interface _is_ different to yours. "i_am_special" is just one of knobs.

> The last remark about 256 CPU case. Leveraging POwerOP such systems will be
> built using just one (current) operating point approach as described
> above.

Notice that Dominik's solution still allows to have more than one
operating point for each of 256 CPUs without explosion of number of
states.

Pavel

> > F) So, how would this work for OMAP1?
> >
> > Let's limit it, to keep it somewhat simple, to the values contained in your
> > "struct pm_core_point" for OMAP:
> >
> > int cpu_vltg; /* voltage in mV */
> > int dpll; /* in KHz */
> > int cpu; /* CPU frequency in KHz */
> > int tc; /* in KHz */
> > int per; /* in KHz */
> > int dsp; /* in KHz */
> > int dspmmu; /* in KHz */
> > int lcd; /* in KHz */
> >
> > and let's also add a
> >
> > int i_am_special;
> >
> > Let's assume that there is an OMAP1 PM module which implements a ->set and
> > ->get function for all of them. A yet-to-be-defined interface then tells
> > this PM module

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