From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751494AbaFDW7Z (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jun 2014 18:59:25 -0400 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:26239 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750925AbaFDW7X (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jun 2014 18:59:23 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.98,976,1392192000"; d="scan'208";a="549911798" Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 15:59:20 -0700 From: Jacob Pan To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Peter Zijlstra , rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, lenb@kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@zytor.com, arjan@linux.intel.com, rui.zhang@intel.com, luto@amacapital.net Subject: Re: [PATCH] idle, thermal, acpi: Remove home grown idle implementations Message-ID: <20140604155920.3fd4e94d@ultegra> In-Reply-To: <1509308.hu7EZQqxxC@vostro.rjw.lan> References: <20140604085418.GA11096@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20140604015812.140a00d1@jacob-desktop> <1509308.hu7EZQqxxC@vostro.rjw.lan> Organization: OTC X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.17; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 23:34:51 +0200 "Rafael J. Wysocki" wrote: > On Wednesday, June 04, 2014 01:58:12 AM Jacob Pan wrote: > > On Wed, 4 Jun 2014 10:54:18 +0200 > > Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > > > > I'm still sitting on this patch. Jacub you were going to make it > > > play nice with QoS? > > > > > I had a patchset to work through system PM QOS and still maintain > > the idle injection efficiency. When I saw you did not merge the > > patch below, I thought you have abandoned it :) > > > > The only issue as per our last discussion is the lack of > > notification when PM QOS cannot be met. But that is intrinsic to PM > > QOS itself. > > > > I also consulted with Arjan and looked at directly intercept with > > intel_idle since both intel_powerclamp and intel_idle are arch > > specific drivers. But I think that is hard to do at per idle period > > basis, since we should still allow "natural" idle during the forced > > idle time. > > > > So, I think we can take a two stepped approach, > > 1. integrate your patch with a > > updated version of https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/11/26/534 such that > > there is no performance/efficiency regression. > > 2. add notification mechanism to system qos when constraints cannot > > be met. > > And then there's a question about how the notification would be > supposed to work. So I guess we can proceed with 1. and really leave > 2. for some time in the future ATM. Sounds good. Let me test/integrate Peter's patch with PM QoS change, powerclamp and acpipad then come up with a patchset. Thanks, Jacob