From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F36F8C433E0 for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 15:56:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAF9F21744 for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 15:56:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2387601AbgGaP44 (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Jul 2020 11:56:56 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:34782 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727997AbgGaP44 (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Jul 2020 11:56:56 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAD25101E; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 08:56:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bogus (unknown [10.37.12.43]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D47A93F66E; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 08:56:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 16:56:50 +0100 From: Sudeep Holla To: Lukasz Luba Cc: Viresh Kumar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, cristian.marussi@arm.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net, Sudeep Holla Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] CPUFreq statistics retrieved by drivers Message-ID: <20200731155650.GC14529@bogus> References: <20200729151208.27737-1-lukasz.luba@arm.com> <20200730085333.qubrsv7ufqninihd@vireshk-mac-ubuntu> <20200730091014.GA13158@bogus> <3b3a56e9-29ec-958f-fb3b-c689a9389d2f@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3b3a56e9-29ec-958f-fb3b-c689a9389d2f@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 10:36:51AM +0100, Lukasz Luba wrote: > > In this case I think we would have to create debugfs. > Sudeep do you think these debugfs should be exposed from the protocol > layer: > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c I prefer above over cpufreq as we can support for all the devices not just cpus which avoids adding similar support elsewhere(mostly devfreq) > or maybe from the cpufreq scmi driver? I would probably be safer to have > it in the cpufreq driver because we have scmi_handle there. > Cristian was thinking if we can consolidate all such debugfs under one device may be and that should eliminate your handle restriction. I would like to see how that works out in implementation but I don't have any better suggestion ATM. -- Regards, Sudeep