From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
To: "Scott E. Preece" <preece@motorola.com>
Cc: eugeny.mints@gmail.com, linux-pm@lists.osdl.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH] PowerOP, PowerOP Core, 1/2
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 16:09:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060922140937.GL3478@elf.ucw.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200609191946.k8JJkJmx028840@olwen.urbana.css.mot.com>
Hi!
> | > >>+struct powerop_driver {
> | > >>+ char *name;
> | > >>+ void *(*create_point) (const char *pwr_params, va_list args);
> | > >>+ int (*set_point) (void *md_opt);
> | > >>+ int (*get_point) (void *md_opt, const char *pwr_params, va_list
> | > >>args);
> | > >>+};
> | > >
> | > >We can certainly get better interface than va_list, right?
> | >
> | > Please elaborate.
> |
> | va_list does not provide adequate type checking. I do not think it
> | suitable in driver<->core interface.
> ---
>
> Well, in this particular case the typing probably has to be weak, one
> way or another. The meaning of the parameters is arguably opaque at
Why not have struct powerop_parameters, defined in machine-specific
header somewhere, but used everywhere?
> the interface - the attributes may be meaningful to specific components
> of the system, but are not defined in the standardized interface (which
> would otherwise have to know about all possible kinds of power
> attributes and be changed every time a new one is added).
>
> So, if you'd rather have an array of char* or void* values, that would
> probably also meet the need, but my guess is that the typing is
> intentionally opaque.
Actually array of integers would be better than this.
> | > >How is it going to work on 8cpu box? will
> | > >you have states like cpu1_800MHz_cpu2_1600MHz_cpu3_800MHz_... ?
> | >
> | > i do not operate with term 'state' so I don't understand what it means here.
> |
> | Okay, state here means "operating point". How will operating points
> | look on 8cpu box? That's 256 states if cpus only support "low" and
> | "high". How do you name them?
>
> I don't think you would name the compounded states. Each CPU would need
> to have its own defined set of operating points (since the capabilities
> of the CPUs can reasonably be different).
Well, having few "powerop domains" per system would likely solve that
problem... and problem of 20 devices on my PC. Can we get that?
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-09-22 14:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-09-19 19:46 [linux-pm] [PATCH] PowerOP, PowerOP Core, 1/2 Scott E. Preece
2006-09-19 20:06 ` Eugeny S. Mints
2006-09-22 14:09 ` Pavel Machek [this message]
2006-09-26 21:45 ` Matthew Locke
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-09-22 21:10 Woodruff, Richard
2006-09-22 20:34 Scott E. Preece
2006-09-23 11:18 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-24 21:33 ` Matthew Locke
2006-09-24 21:45 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-22 20:28 Scott E. Preece
2006-09-22 21:18 ` Vitaly Wool
2006-09-19 21:37 Scott E. Preece
2006-09-22 14:11 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-22 14:48 ` Igor Stoppa
2006-09-14 14:37 Eugeny S. Mints
2006-09-18 10:44 ` [linux-pm] " Pavel Machek
2006-09-18 11:32 ` Eugeny S. Mints
2006-09-18 19:58 ` Eugeny S. Mints
2006-09-18 20:07 ` Vitaly Wool
2006-09-19 18:22 ` Pavel Machek
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=20060922140937.GL3478@elf.ucw.cz \
--to=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=eugeny.mints@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=preece@motorola.com \
/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