Re: PM QoS dynamic resource manager

[Bryan Huntsman <bryanh@codeaurora.org>]

>> http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/4/22/213  (I guess the details are in the
>> archives)  I'm happy to re-visit it.
>>
> 
> Interesting patch, it looks like having a "system wide bus" doesn't
> easily apply to msm and tegra platforms.
> An example of some things I would like to be able to control are i2c
> and memory bus.
> 
> I'm tempted to suggest adding two types memory and i2c but I'm not
> sure how future proof this will be given the growing complexity in the
> embedded hardware road-map.
> What about the possibility of registering not one but several buses?
> You could add a bus qos param, with a type enum, or bind to some
> platform_driver or bus_driver
> 
> Then there's the issue of having to deal with platform specific buses,
> do you add this type to pm qos with only one user? Or have some
> platform bus types defined somewhere. The generic code of min / max
> for resource X can be useful so everyone doesn't spin their own
> resource framework in their own architecture.
> 
> -- Mike

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.

- Bryan