public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Frank Oltmanns <frank@oltmanns.dev>
To: "Jernej Škrabec" <jernej.skrabec@gmail.com>,
	"Maxime Ripard" <mripard@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev,
	Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com>,
	Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org>, Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@aosc.io>,
	Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
	Samuel Holland <samuel@sholland.org>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] clk: sunxi-ng: Optimize rate selection for NKM clocks
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2023 13:41:17 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <877csi9lwi.fsf@oltmanns.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bhjq4yxo7fvddq3kvvvbgefhyaygb5bwkzhsjp3adc5kp7ohtx@iclghpep3zkw>

Hi Jernej,
hi Maxime,

On 2023-06-02 at 09:34:03 +0200, Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org> wrote:
> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
> On Thu, Jun 01, 2023 at 09:41:30PM +0200, Jernej Škrabec wrote:
>> Dne četrtek, 01. junij 2023 ob 07:16:45 CEST je Frank Oltmanns napisal(a):
>> > Re: Why speed up factor calculation?
>> > ====================================
>> > I'm not aware that the current implementation of calculating n, k, and m
>> > poses a bottleneck in any situation. Again, while going through the
>> > code, I wondered why not save a few CPU cycles by precalculating the
>> > meaningful combinations. In my opinion, it does not have any side
>> > effects, so we might as well do it. (There is of course the side effect
>> > of using a higher rate, but this is unrelated to precalculation as I
>> > could as well employ a rate comparison that only allows lower rates, or
>> > only optionally higher rates.)
>> >
>> > > Clocks in general are very regression-prone, so I'd rather be a bit
>> > > conservative there, and "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".
>> >
>> > Sure, I get that.
>> >
>> > As I stated in my cover letter:
>> > "The motivation for these proposed changes lies in the current behavior
>> > of rate selection for NKM clocks, which doesn't observe the
>> > CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT flag. I.e. it does not select a different rate for
>> > the parent clock to find the optimal rate."
>> >
>> > I thought that this required this optimization to be implemented, but by
>> > now, I'm no longer sure. I'll probably continue investigating different
>> > paths for CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT for NKM clocks and follow up with new
>> > findings.
>>
>> Let's leave out any optimizations that are not apparently needed. Most clock
>> rates are set only once at boot and others, like video clocks, not that often,
>> so a suboptimal code speed doesn't hurt currently.
>
> I'm not even sure we can make that assumption for video clocks. We might
> for a panel, but for a more "dynamic" output like HDMI all bets are off
> and depending on the monitor, the user settings and the userspace stack
> we can definitely expect the video clock to change quite frequently.

Thank you both for your valuable feedback!

The goal I head in mind was adjusting pll-video0's clock when setting
DCLK on Allwinner A64. And you're both right, I got sidetracked by
premature optimizations.

As I wrote elsewhere in this thread, I will submit a patchset for the
original goal and we can discuss potential needs for optimization there.

Thanks,
  Frank

>
> Maxime
>
> [[End of PGP Signed Part]]

  reply	other threads:[~2023-06-05 11:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-05-27 13:27 [RFC PATCH 0/3] clk: sunxi-ng: Optimize rate selection for NKM clocks Frank Oltmanns
2023-05-27 13:27 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] clk: sunxi-ng: nkm: Minimize difference when finding rate Frank Oltmanns
2023-05-27 13:27 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] clk: sunxi-ng: Implement precalculated NKM rate selection Frank Oltmanns
2023-05-27 23:19   ` Julian Calaby
2023-05-28  9:12     ` Frank Oltmanns
2023-05-28 15:32       ` Julian Calaby
2023-05-28 17:12         ` Frank Oltmanns
2023-05-28 14:11   ` Frank Oltmanns
2023-05-27 13:27 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] clk: sunxi-ng: sun50i-a64: Precalculate NKM combinations for pll-mipi Frank Oltmanns
2023-05-31 13:48 ` [RFC PATCH 0/3] clk: sunxi-ng: Optimize rate selection for NKM clocks Maxime Ripard
2023-06-01  5:16   ` Frank Oltmanns
2023-06-01 19:41     ` Jernej Škrabec
2023-06-02  7:34       ` Maxime Ripard
2023-06-05 11:41         ` Frank Oltmanns [this message]
2023-06-02  7:31     ` Maxime Ripard
2023-06-05 10:31       ` Frank Oltmanns
2023-06-06 14:02         ` Maxime Ripard
2023-06-06 20:40           ` Frank Oltmanns
2023-06-07 11:42             ` Maxime Ripard

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=877csi9lwi.fsf@oltmanns.dev \
    --to=frank@oltmanns.dev \
    --cc=andre.przywara@arm.com \
    --cc=icenowy@aosc.io \
    --cc=jernej.skrabec@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=mripard@kernel.org \
    --cc=mturquette@baylibre.com \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=samuel@sholland.org \
    --cc=sboyd@kernel.org \
    --cc=wens@csie.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