From: Antti Miettinen <ananaza@iki.fi>
To: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
Cc: "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
Dave P Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@arm.com>,
Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha@arm.com>,
Charles Garcia-Tobin <Charles.Garcia-Tobin@arm.com>,
Nicolas Pitre <nico@linaro.org>,
"rob.herring@calxeda.com" <rob.herring@calxeda.com>,
Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@nvidia.com>,
"grant.likely@linaro.org" <grant.likely@linaro.org>,
Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>,
Mark Hambleton <mark.hambleton@broadcom.com>,
Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@linaro.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] Documentation: arm: define DT C-states bindings
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 00:04:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87haaggy6s.fsf@iki.fi> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131210132719.GC15543@e102568-lin.cambridge.arm.com> (Lorenzo Pieralisi's message of "Tue, 10 Dec 2013 13:27:19 +0000")
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> writes:
> I do not think we should think about how the kernel uses this data.
> We should strive to make DT data representative of HW C-states and
> that's very complex, as you mentioned (it depends at what granularity
> we want these bits of info).
>
> When we are happy with the bindings we can then code the kernel accordingly.
>
> Please let me know how you would like to have these bindings extended
> (eg adding operating points), getting feedback is the main reason why
> I posted them in the first place.
Hmm.. I'd like to challenge that a bit. I guess we are not defining DT
bindings just for the joy of modelling the hardware? We should care
whether kernel needs the data and have some idea of how the data will be
used.
As you say, modelling C state details is not trivial. It might be
possible to construct an approximate formula for e.g. entry/exit latency
that takes CPU frequency, memory frequency and PMIC ramp rates as
input. Also, in principle we could estimate power based on clocks,
voltages, temperature etc. As we probably do not want to put function
definitions to DT, the DT would contain e.g. coefficients for functions
that would need to be platform neutral.
Is this what you'd like to see? There has been some research in
estimating power without actually measuring it, e.g. the google
powertutor people have written some papers about this. The latencies
could be measured to some extend with instrumentation in the kernel and
the measurement results could be used to tune some parameters.
Or would you rather have tables, which specify latencies and power
levels and the tables would be indexed with frequencies and voltages?
Anyway, I would really like to see the option of having the state choice
in the driver. One possible way to achieve this would be to allow for
the driver to export an optional "choose" method. If that exists the
governor would offload the decision to the driver.
--Antti
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-10 22:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-02 16:20 [PATCH RFC 0/2] ARM: defining power states DT bindings Lorenzo Pieralisi
[not found] ` <1386001205-11978-1-git-send-email-lorenzo.pieralisi-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>
2013-12-02 16:20 ` [PATCH RFC 1/2] Documentation: arm: add cache " Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-12-02 17:28 ` Kumar Gala
2013-12-02 17:50 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-12-02 17:59 ` Kumar Gala
2013-12-02 18:34 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-12-04 13:29 ` Dave Martin
2013-12-04 15:00 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-12-02 16:20 ` [PATCH RFC 2/2] Documentation: arm: define DT C-states bindings Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-12-02 18:08 ` Kumar Gala
2013-12-03 10:40 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-12-04 15:36 ` Kumar Gala
2013-12-04 16:31 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
[not found] ` <1386001205-11978-3-git-send-email-lorenzo.pieralisi-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>
2013-12-03 11:52 ` Daniel Lezcano
2013-12-04 15:20 ` Dave Martin
2013-12-04 17:06 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-12-06 14:54 ` Vincent Guittot
2013-12-10 6:31 ` Antti Miettinen
2013-12-10 13:27 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-12-10 22:04 ` Antti Miettinen [this message]
2013-12-16 12:11 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
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=87haaggy6s.fsf@iki.fi \
--to=ananaza@iki.fi \
--cc=Charles.Garcia-Tobin@arm.com \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=Mark.Rutland@arm.com \
--cc=Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha@arm.com \
--cc=amit.kucheria@linaro.org \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=grant.likely@linaro.org \
--cc=hanjun.guo@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=mark.hambleton@broadcom.com \
--cc=nico@linaro.org \
--cc=pdeschrijver@nvidia.com \
--cc=rob.herring@calxeda.com \
--cc=santosh.shilimkar@ti.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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