From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754690AbeDPMbK (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Apr 2018 08:31:10 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:58988 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754658AbeDPMbI (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Apr 2018 08:31:08 -0400 Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 13:31:02 +0100 From: Sudeep Holla To: Daniel Lezcano Cc: Viresh Kumar , edubezval@gmail.com, kevin.wangtao@linaro.org, leo.yan@linaro.org, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, javi.merino@kernel.org, rui.zhang@intel.com, daniel.thompson@linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Amit Daniel Kachhap , Sudeep Holla Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] thermal/drivers/cpu_cooling: Introduce the cpu idle cooling driver Message-ID: <20180416123102.GD3706@e107533-lin> References: <3f3b3b7a-3b74-aee2-2fac-f2759babe3f0@arm.com> <939f7943-feec-aaa2-3bd3-59a6618330c0@linaro.org> <20180416073729.GA4244@vireshk-i7> <0a3164f9-4738-e24e-6ed0-2c75024c304c@linaro.org> <20180416093747.GB4244@vireshk-i7> <4abf0d97-d2b8-46ab-3c05-4a11510ac3fe@linaro.org> <20180416095006.GC4244@vireshk-i7> <20180416101021.GD4244@vireshk-i7> <1c61128a-dea6-b12c-4cd8-ef53a5c8628d@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1c61128a-dea6-b12c-4cd8-ef53a5c8628d@linaro.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 02:10:30PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > On 16/04/2018 12:10, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > On 16-04-18, 12:03, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > >> On 16/04/2018 11:50, Viresh Kumar wrote: > >>> On 16-04-18, 11:45, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > >>>> Can you elaborate a bit ? I'm not sure to get the point. > >>> > >>> Sure. With your current code on Hikey960 (big/LITTLE), you end up > >>> creating two cooling devices, one for the big cluster and one for > >>> small cluster. Which is the right thing to do, as we also have two > >>> cpufreq cooling devices. > >>> > >>> But with the change Sudeep is referring to, the helper you used to get > >>> cluster id will return 0 (SoC id) for all the 8 CPUs. So your code > >>> will end up creating a single cpuidle cooling device for all the CPUs. > >>> Which would be wrong. > >> > >> Is the semantic of topology_physical_package_id changing ? > > > > That's what I understood from his email. > > > >> I don't > >> understand the change Sudeep is referring to. > > Actually there is no impact with the change Sudeep is referring to. It > is for ACPI, we are DT based. Confirmed with Jeremy. > No, it will change for DT. The aim is to be consistent irrespective of h/w or f/w description(i.e ADCPI or DT) -- Regards, Sudeep