From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Lezcano Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] cpu_cooling: Drop static-power related stuff Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 19:05:46 +0100 Message-ID: <6cd409ee-c839-09ad-3fa2-5309b0d007f5@linaro.org> References: <65fef2a1-d23f-3de2-bd91-021296c3e2f7@arm.com> <20171116152058.GR3257@vireshk-i7> <2810372.fJ2vMN0cWO@aspire.rjw.lan> <20171116234422.GA6141@localhost.localdomain> <878tf5tbfj.fsf@e105922-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <35d3751d-f28d-38c2-02b2-c9980f11c52e@arm.com> <5A144CB3.50806@gmail.com> <20171121165703.GA2499@localhost.localdomain> <20171121180006.GA26638@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f65.google.com ([74.125.82.65]:42039 "EHLO mail-wm0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751318AbdKUSFv (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Nov 2017 13:05:51 -0500 Received: by mail-wm0-f65.google.com with SMTP id l188so3481785wma.1 for ; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 10:05:50 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20171121180006.GA26638@localhost> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: Javi Merino , Eduardo Valentin Cc: Vincent Guittot , Lukasz Luba , Ionela Voinescu , Punit Agrawal , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Viresh Kumar , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Amit Daniel Kachhap , Zhang Rui , Steven Rostedt , Ingo Molnar , Linux PM , Lukasz Luba , Linux Kernel Mailing List On 21/11/2017 19:00, Javi Merino wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 08:57:06AM -0800, Eduardo Valentin wrote: > > [snip] > >> As I said before, the minimal you guys (ARM and Linaro) can do is to at >> least upstream the Juno code! as a reference. Come on guys? what is >> preventing you to upstream Juno model? > > As Ionela pointed out earlier in the thread, the cpufreq driver for Juno > was not acceptable for mainline because it used platform specific code. > When it was converted to cpufreq-dt, the static power was left behind > because it can't be represented in device tree. This is because there > isn't a function that works for every SoC, different process nodes > (among other things) will need different functions. So it can't be just > a bunch of coefficients in DT, we need a function. Hence the callback. The DT could contain the coef and a compatible string for a specific polynomial computation callback. I imagine we should not have a lot of different equations, no ? -- Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog