Linux Power Management development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@gmail.com>
To: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com>
Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net, vireshk@kernel.org,
	nm@ti.com, sboyd@codeaurora.org, sudeep.holla@arm.com,
	amit.kachhap@gmail.com, javi.merino@kernel.org,
	rui.zhang@intel.com, matthias.bgg@gmail.com,
	dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, morten.rasmussen@arm.com,
	patrick.bellasi@arm.com, ionela.voinescu@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] thermal, OPP: move the CPU power estimation to the OPP library
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 11:34:33 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180110193431.GE3837@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180109110252.13557-1-quentin.perret@arm.com>

On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 11:02:50AM +0000, Quentin Perret wrote:
> Currently, IPA estimates the power dissipated by a CPU at each available OPP
> using its capacitance (the dynamic-power-coefficient DT binding). This series
> relocates this feature into the OPP library as a preparation for future
> changes. More specifically:
> 
>    1. The current DT-based approach for power estimation will need deep
>       changes to support SCMI-provided power values. While the thermal
>       subsystem is not necessarily the best place to hide multiple power
>       estimation methods, the OPP library appears to be a good candidate to
>       implement the required platform abstraction.
>    2. The energy models of CPUs will be needed by other clients in the future
>       (such as the task scheduler or CPUFreq governors for example) in order
>       to make energy-aware decisions. The relocation to the OPP library will
>       enable code re-use and all clients will benefit form the platform
>       abstraction mentioned previously.

To be quite frank, I am happy to see this leaving thermal subsystem.
However, a few concerns with the patch set as it is. First, I am not
convinced PM OPP is the right place to put this, nor I see a good
explanation put in the patch set why it must be part of PM OPP.
Second, looks like we are following ARM "good" practice of fixing
problems of the future. I would only really sign off for this series
when we see real "other future users", otherwise we end up with the
infamous static power scenario in 2-3 years down the row. If we
currently do not have users of this IN MAINLINE KERNEL, then the series
is not for upstream.

> 
> Quentin Perret (2):
>   PM / OPP: introduce an OPP power estimation helper
>   thermal: cpu_cooling: use power models from the OPP library
> 
>  drivers/cpufreq/arm_big_little.c   |  2 ++
>  drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c       |  2 ++
>  drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c |  2 ++
>  drivers/opp/core.c                 | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  drivers/opp/of.c                   | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  drivers/opp/opp.h                  |  4 +++
>  drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c      | 33 ++++++---------------
>  include/linux/pm_opp.h             | 20 +++++++++++++
>  8 files changed, 140 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
> 
> -- 
> 2.15.1
> 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2018-01-10 19:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-01-09 11:02 [PATCH 0/2] thermal, OPP: move the CPU power estimation to the OPP library Quentin Perret
2018-01-09 11:02 ` [PATCH 1/2] PM / OPP: introduce an OPP power estimation helper Quentin Perret
2018-01-10  4:36   ` Viresh Kumar
2018-01-10 10:20     ` Quentin Perret
2018-01-10 10:25       ` Viresh Kumar
2018-01-10 10:36         ` Quentin Perret
2018-01-09 11:02 ` [PATCH 2/2] thermal: cpu_cooling: use power models from the OPP library Quentin Perret
2018-01-10  4:37   ` Viresh Kumar
2018-01-10 19:34 ` Eduardo Valentin [this message]
2018-01-11  9:42   ` [PATCH 0/2] thermal, OPP: move the CPU power estimation to " Viresh Kumar
2018-01-11  9:42   ` Quentin Perret
2018-01-12 17:24     ` Eduardo Valentin
2018-01-12 17:44       ` Quentin Perret
2018-01-12 17:47         ` Eduardo Valentin
2018-01-12 17:50           ` Quentin Perret
2018-01-15  4:26       ` Viresh Kumar
2018-01-15 17:46         ` Eduardo Valentin
2018-01-16  9:16           ` Quentin Perret

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20180110193431.GE3837@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=edubezval@gmail.com \
    --cc=amit.kachhap@gmail.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=ionela.voinescu@arm.com \
    --cc=javi.merino@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=matthias.bgg@gmail.com \
    --cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
    --cc=nm@ti.com \
    --cc=patrick.bellasi@arm.com \
    --cc=quentin.perret@arm.com \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=rui.zhang@intel.com \
    --cc=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
    --cc=vireshk@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox